In Haskell, the class Functor
is declared as:
class Functor f where
fmap :: (a -> b) -> f a -> f b
Can type variables a
and b
be function types, or must they be non-function types?
If they can be function types, isn't it that class Functor
become effectively the same as class Applicative
, in terms of making fmap
able to apply to functions with arbitrary number of arguments? According to what Programming in Haskell by Hutton says:
Functors abstract the idea of
fmap
mapping a function over each element of a structure. Applicatives generalize this idea to allowfmap
mapping functions with any number of arguments to be mapped, rather than being restricted to functions with a single argument.
In applicative:
fmap0 :: a -> f a fmap0 = pure fmap1 :: (a -> b) -> f a -> f b fmap1 g x = pure g <*> x fmap2 :: (a -> b -> c) -> f a -> f b -> f c fmap2 g x y = pure g <*> x <*> y fmap3 :: (a -> b -> c -> d) -> f a -> f b -> f c -> f d fmap3 g x y z = pure g <*> x <*> y <*> z
Class Applicative
is declared as:
class Functor f => Applicative f where pure :: a -> f a (<*>) :: f (a -> b) -> f a -> f b
Thanks.
a
and b
can be function types. They can be any type. In fact, a valid Functor
must allow them to be any type.
To answer your Applicative
question, let's try it.
fmap :: (a -> b -> c) -> f a -> f (b -> c)
Okay, great! Now I can take an f a
and convert it to a f (b -> c)
. But.... then what? I can't apply f (b -> c)
to an argument. It's not a function; it's a value of my functor type. If only we had a function with this signature...
superFmap :: f (b -> c) -> f b -> f c
But that sure does look a lot like
(<*>) :: f (b -> c) -> f b -> f c
which is a member of Applicative
. Hence, we need Applicative
to be able to apply this secondary result.
What the other answers said is correct. We can't implement pure
either, for similar reasons. But it's important to note that we can't even get (<*>)
in general, because if we could then that would imply that every Functor
is Apply
, which is also certainly not the case.