Collections (was: Arrays)
Robert Dockins
robdockins at fastmail.fm
Thu Mar 2 14:55:32 EST 2006
On Mar 2, 2006, at 1:57 PM, Alson Kemp wrote:
>> This doesn't address Bags, Heaps, Finite Relations
>> or 'cons'able
>> sequences.
> True.
>
> Perhaps my listing was incomplete, in which case this
> might fix it:
>>> Collection
>>> .Array
> * * .Bag
> * * .FiniteRelations -- Maps?
Finite Relations are to Finite Maps as Bags are to Sets. Each key
can be associated with multiple elements.
> * * .Heap
>>> .Map
>>> .Set
>>> .Tree
>>> .Binary
>>> .Rose
>>> Data
>>> . ...
>>> . Int
>>> . ...
>
> What is an example of a cons-able sequence? (aside
> from [])
See http://www.eecs.tufts.edu/~rdocki01/docs/edison/index.html
Edison contains about 8 or 9 different concrete implementations of
sequences with varying time complexity for the core operations.
> Or, perhaps as a non-math-geared programmer, I've
> missed something. I come at this from "make Haskell
> more useful to more programmers" rather than from
> "make Haskell a mathematically beautiful language" (I
> slept through Discrete Mathematics). That said, if
> you can point me towards a paper, I'd be happy to read
> up and try to encompass the "mathematically beautiful"
> perspective, too. (Especially since the proposal will
> probably get rejected without a component of
> mathematical beauty! ;) )
I don't know of any papers of the top of my head. I guess I just
wanted to point out that the landscape of abstract data structures is
wider than "Array, Set, Map".
Rob Dockins
Speak softly and drive a Sherman tank.
Laugh hard; it's a long way to the bank.
-- TMBG
More information about the Haskell-prime
mailing list