These are chat archives for non/algebra

23rd
Sep 2016
Ben Hutchison
@benhutchison
Sep 23 2016 04:52

@benhutchison let's open an issue. especially if it's optional i don't think there will be too much objection.

@non yep, will get to raising a syntax ticket in coming days/weeks. First need to take some time to get across the plan for migrating spire on top of algebra.

I guess if algebra had "standalone" syntax, we'd want it to be source compat with Spire syntax where possible . So if people wrote against algebra and then wanted extra spire features, the transition might just be changing some syntax imports (eg import algebra.syntax.all_ => import spire.syntax.all._ or whatever).

Or do you envisage one copy of the syntax, living inside algebra, which is somehow exposed through spire imports (eg spire package objects mixin syntax traits defined in algebra)

Denis Rosset
@denisrosset
Sep 23 2016 05:57
@benhutchison : if you do this, beware the syntax of the % operator. We are trying to understand the different meanings of the "modulo" operation here typelevel/algebra#172