Now, to help solve this problem, I wrote ListLike[2], providing a
set of typeclasses that make list operations generic. I also provided
default instances of ListLike for:
ListLike Data.ByteString.ByteString Word8
ListLike Data.ByteString.Lazy.ByteString Word8
ListLike [a] a
(Integral i, Ix i) => ListLike (Array i e) e
(Ord key, Eq val) => ListLike (Map key val) (key, val)
It's a multi-parameter type class, right? So it's difficult to push it to
the core.
Now, the questions:
1) Does everyone agree with me that we have a problem here?
I agree.
2) Would it make sense to make ListLike, or something like it,
part of the Haskell core?
Somehow yes. However since the 'base' package is constantly split into
smaller parts, there is maybe no need to merge it somewhere, but introduce
simply new package dependencies.
3) Would it make sense to base as much code as possible in the Haskell
core areound ListLike definitions? Here I think of functions such
as lines and words, which make sense both on [Char] as well as
ByteStrings.
4) We are missing one final useful type: a Word32-based ByteString.
When working in the Unicode character set, a 32-bit character
can indeed be useful, and I could see situations in which the
performance benefit of a ByteString-like implementation could
be useful combared to [Char].
StorableVector should fill this gap.
http://code.haskell.org/~sjanssen/storablevector/
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
