Is there already a list class?
robdockins at fastmail.fm
Wed Jan 10 11:36:19 EST 2007
On Jan 10, 2007, at 11:12 AM, Jean-Philippe Bernardy wrote:
> On 1/10/07, Spencer Janssen <sjanssen at cse.unl.edu> wrote:
>> On Jan 10, 2007, at 3:25 AM, Jean-Philippe Bernardy wrote:
>> > I suggest you have a look a the classes for collections that
>> I've been
>> > working on.
>> > It's an attempt at unifying all collection types in a single
>> > of classes.
>> > darcs repository:
>> > http://darcs.haskell.org/packages/collections
>> How does this library compare to Edison?
> The collections package is intended as an evolution from the
> collection types in the package rather than a radically different
> design. In other words, it's easier to move to the collection packages
> than to edison. Another advantage is that every type is in the same
> "hierarchy" of classes (no separate class for associative
> collections). It also makes heavy usage of MTPC+fundeps, I suspect in
> a way very close to what Robert plans to do for edison. On the other
> hand, there are more types in the edison library.
> Robert: if that is actually the direction where you want to move for
> edison, I'd suggest to merge the two packages.
Something like this might be feasible for the medium/long-term reorg
I have in mind; however, like I said, I'm still trying to work out
exactly what I'm aiming for. I have this thought that there should
be some principled way to organize these classes based on an
underlying mathematical model, but it hasn't quite crystalized in my
> Here's the link to the wiki page:
Speak softly and drive a Sherman tank.
Laugh hard; it's a long way to the bank.
More information about the Libraries