On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Brent Yorgey <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:byorgey@seas.upenn.edu" target="_blank">byorgey@seas.upenn.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div id=":2my">Everyone is invited to review this proposal, following the standard<br>
procedure [2] for proposing and reviewing packages.<br></div></blockquote></div><div><br></div><div>My comments:</div><div><br></div><div>I'm generally in favour of this, as the split library is quite nice. A couple of more specific notes follow.</div>
<div><br>Would you have any interest in abstracting this library over other particularly common list-like sequences? There's obviously a need for similar functionality with e.g. the text and bytestring libraries (maybe vector too, though I'm more dubious), and proliferating this API into those packages doesn't seem like the best way to go.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Speaking of the text library, it already provides a function named chunksOf that is identical to your splitEvery:</div><div><br></div><div><a href="http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/text/0.11.2.2/doc/html/Data-Text.html#v:chunksOf">http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/text/0.11.2.2/doc/html/Data-Text.html#v:chunksOf</a></div>
<div><br></div><div>For consistency with an existing HP library, I think you should rename splitEvery to chunksOf.</div>