Optimize or remove reduceMapM?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Scala
- Stars
- 5.5k
- Forks
- 1.2k
- Avg merge
- 2d 10h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 5
Description
We currently have foldMapA and foldMapM methods with identical semantics (apart from the constraint), because the monadic implementation using tailRecM can be much faster than the implementation that can only use Applicative.
We've recently added a reduceMapA with a similarly loosened constraint (see #3141, #3150, and #3199). Right now reduceMapM and reduceMapA have identical implementations. It's probably the case that reduceMapM could be implemented more efficiently using tailRecM, and we should either do this or deprecate it, because otherwise there's no reason for it to exist and it's just confusing.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by comparing the implementations and constraints of foldMapA, foldMapM, reduceMapA, and reduceMapM, then read the linked tailRecM performance discussion and referenced issues #3141, #3150, and #3199. Done means resolving whether reduceMapM should use the faster monadic approach or be deprecated, with the corresponding implementation or API change completed.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- scala
- Domain
- tooling
- Issue type
- Refactor
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 30/100