On 17/03/2010, at 03:16, Louis Wasserman wrote: > I'm not willing to do this sort of typeclass wrapper thing, primarily because > nothing else in containers does -- even though we might have a Mapping type > class that handles both IntMap and Map, we don't. > > I'm inclined to let that design choice stand, as far as containers is > concerned. It would make perfect sense to write a new package with such a > type class and offering instances for the containers priority queue > implementations, but I prefer to stick with the style that containers already > seems to use -- that is, exporting separate modules without a unifying type > class, but with nearly-identical method signatures.
FWIW, vector does both. It defines most vector operations generically and then exports appropriate specialisations for each concrete vector type. I think this is the most flexible and convenient approach. I just wish Haskell had some kind of support for it. Roman _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
