G'day all. Quoting Brian Hulley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> The problem is that some people will be using Data.Edison.Seq at the moment > and will naturally not want it to change. However I'd suggest that all the > common operations be factored out into separate classes eg: While I think the huge typeclass is unfortunate, one of Edison's greatest strengths is that every sequence supports every sequence operation. (The catch, of course, is that the operation may be inefficient.) This was a deliberate design decision, and I'd be sorry to see it go. Many is the time in C++ when I started, say, with a std::stack, then discovered soon after that I needed to peer at the top few elements on the stack, only to find that std::stack doesn't support that. Supporting all operations supports exploratory/agile programming. You don't have to decide up front what operations you need to be fast. You can discover this as you go. Yes, this is orthogonal to breaking up the huge typeclass, but I thought I'd just mention it. Cheers, Andrew Bromage _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
