On 30/11/2008, at 02:43, Brad Larsen wrote:
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 19:00:38 -0500, Roman Leshchinskiy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
On 29/11/2008, at 10:47, Claus Reinke wrote:
[...]
And would it be difficult for you all to agree on a standard API, to
make switching between the alternatives easy (if
it is indeed impossible to unify their advantages in a single
library,
the reasons for which should also be documented somewhere)?
Yes, it is very difficult. A sensible API for a standard array
library
is something that needs more research. FWIW, I don't know of any
other
language that has what I'd like to see in Haskell. C++ probably comes
closest but they have it easy - they don't do fusion.
[...]
Would you elaborate on what you'd like to see in an array library?
I'd like to have a library which is efficient (in particular,
implements aggressive fusion), is roughly equivalent to the current
standard list library in power and supports strict/unboxed/mutable
arrays. It should also provide a generic framework for implementing
new kinds of arrays. And eventually, it should also be usable in high-
performance and parallel algorithms.
And perhaps which C++ array library you are thinking of? Your C++
comment caught my attention, and now I'm curious. Surely you don't
mean C-style arrays. :-D
No, I meant vector, basic_string and deque which are provided by the
standard library.
Roman
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
