Is this for instances of Comonad that you use, or so you can supply your own instances without a comonad dependency? I ask because I think I can recall a single time I actually had a use for comonad, and my understanding is that in Haskell comonads are relatively uninteresting - but it sounds like I'm mistaken!
On Fri, 11 Sep 2020, at 7:54 PM, Sandy Maguire wrote:
I frequently regret the lack of having the Comonad class in base. Are there any good reasons for its absence? If not, I can get started on a patch.
Sorry, I still have semigroupoids on my mind. There's no renaming like with Foldable1, so yes the migration path is not more complicated than what you say.
I still think a proposal is worthwhile because many people (including myself) fail to see motivation for comonads in every day programming. The fact that Ollie, an experienced haskell programmer, also shares this sentiment makes me more certain that people need motivating. I think a proposal is a good way to do that.