Relation to monoid-subclasses

[BebeSparkelSparkel]

I'm the author and maintainer of monoid-subclasses which is kinda in the same space. I'd be motivated to bring the two libraries together if there's any technical reason to do so.

Originally posted by @blamario in #223 (comment)

@blamario Could you please elaborate more on your vision "to bring the two libraries together"?

From what I see is that mono-traversable has a lot more functions while monoid-subclasses relies a lot more on type wrappers to specify the desired instance implementation.

[blamario]

Could you please elaborate more on your vision "to bring the two libraries together"?

Not at the moment. It's just something I stated in the interest of openness, I didn't really give it any thought. The two libraries share a similar purpose, but obviously their designs took very different paths. They both build upon the standard base classes, but whereas mono-traversable mimicks Foldable and Traversable, monoid-subclasses builds upon Semigroup and Monoid.