Thanks for making this proposal, Twan. I've actually been meaning to make the same proposal for the last few weeks. Before I understood the proposal process (thanks again to Milan for filling me in) I made a pull request on GitHub with an implementation of a `successor` function on IntMap (very similar to your `findGreaterEqual`).<div>
<br></div><div><a href="https://github.com/haskell/containers/pull/8">https://github.com/haskell/containers/pull/8</a><br><div><br></div><div>It shows that a more efficient implementation is available, which avoids `splitLookup` and therefore `union`. (Disclaimer: I haven't run any benchmarks to show that my internal implementation is actually faster.)</div>
<div><br></div><div>As I mention in that pull, these functions are useful for very practical things like consistent hashing, etc.</div><div><div><br clear="all">Mike Craig<br><br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Johan Tibell <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:johan.tibell@gmail.com">johan.tibell@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hi,<br>
<br>
First, thanks for writing such a detailed proposal.<br>
<br>
I don't have strong feelings one way or the other. Like always I'm<br>
worried about API growth. How about performance? Can these functions<br>
be implemented efficiently outside the library?<br>
<br>
Since I don't feel strongly either way I'm fine with this if Milan and<br>
the community are.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Johan<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Libraries mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Libraries@haskell.org">Libraries@haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries" target="_blank">http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div>