On Mar 2, 2006, at 1:57 PM, Alson Kemp wrote:
This doesn't address Bags, Heaps, Finite Relations
or 'cons'able
sequences.
True.
Perhaps my listing was incomplete, in which case this
might fix it:
Collection
.Array
* * .Bag
* * .FiniteRelations -- Maps?
Finite Relations are to Finite Maps as Bags are to Sets. Each key
can be associated with multiple elements.
* * .Heap
.Map
.Set
.Tree
.Binary
.Rose
Data
. ...
. Int
. ...
What is an example of a cons-able sequence? (aside
from [])
See http://www.eecs.tufts.edu/~rdocki01/docs/edison/index.html
Edison contains about 8 or 9 different concrete implementations of
sequences with varying time complexity for the core operations.
Or, perhaps as a non-math-geared programmer, I've
missed something. I come at this from "make Haskell
more useful to more programmers" rather than from
"make Haskell a mathematically beautiful language" (I
slept through Discrete Mathematics). That said, if
you can point me towards a paper, I'd be happy to read
up and try to encompass the "mathematically beautiful"
perspective, too. (Especially since the proposal will
probably get rejected without a component of
mathematical beauty! ;) )
I don't know of any papers of the top of my head. I guess I just
wanted to point out that the landscape of abstract data structures is
wider than "Array, Set, Map".
Rob Dockins
Speak softly and drive a Sherman tank.
Laugh hard; it's a long way to the bank.
-- TMBG
_______________________________________________
Haskell-prime mailing list
[email protected]
http://haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
