Stuck on an issue?

Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.

And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.

More Option functions

See original GitHub issue

In the F# User Voice forum, there’s a suggestion to add various functions to the Option module. These include:

Option.getOrDefault : 'a -> 'a option -> 'a
Option.map2: ('a -> 'b -> 'c) -> 'a option -> 'b option -> 'c option
Option.map3: ('a -> 'b -> 'c -> 'd) -> 'a option -> 'b option -> 'c option -> 'd option

I often find that I need better building blocks for option values, and while they’re easy enough to define, I think it would make the F# language more productive if these fundamental functions were already present.

I’ll be happy to write the tests and implementation and send a pull request for this, but I’m opening this issue first, in order to gauge the interest.

If there’s interest, I’ll get started on some pull requests, but if there’s no interest, please close this issue and the User Voice suggestion.

Issue Analytics

State:
Created 8 years ago
Comments:7 (7 by maintainers)

Top GitHub Comments

1reaction

smoothdevelopercommented, Feb 23, 2016

Please consider reviewing @vasily-kirichenko answer in this user voice, there seems to be many other existing resources to draw from, should we prepare a RFC so we can discuss naming / signatures to greater extent?

Definitely agree that having more extensive support over Option in the core library makes lots of sense.

0reactions

dsymecommented, Mar 1, 2016

@ploeh @enricosada Yes, basically, feel free to send a PR creating the RFC for any approved-in-principle issue. First in first served. If you want to grab the token then send one doing nothing but renaming the file, and then fill in the further details.