The intuition of an optional type like Maybe Int is that either there is no Int (thus, there's Nothing there) or that there is some Int; there is something there.It makes sense to me that we call the type constructor for the negative case Nothing, since it means exactly that -- that there's no Int there. But why use the word Just in the case where the emphasis is on something actually being there?To me, the word Just carries the connotation that the thing it's describing is less than the alternative; the opposite of something actually being there; for example,A: Are you doing anything tonight?B: No; I'm just gonna stay in and watch TV.A: Did you investigate the creepy ghost sounds around your house?B: yeah, turns out it was actually just an owl.Clearly I'm lacking whatever intuition this naming choice was based on. What is it? Because to me, the word Just means the opposite of how it's used in the Maybe type.
What are some intuitions that support calling the Maybe constructor in Haskell Just?
functional programming;haskell;data types;null