On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Ian Lynagh <ig...@earth.li> wrote: > Data.Text seems to think that many of them are worth reimplementing for > Text. It looks like someone's systematically gone through Data.List. > And in fact, very few functions there /don't/ look like they are > directly equivalent to list functions.
I'm not sure why the list-inspired functions are there. It doesn't really matter. It doesn't change the fact that from a Unicode perspective they give the wrong result in most situations. > This is no more incorrect than > upcase = Data.Text.map toUpper No and that's why Bryan added a correct case-modification, case folding, etc to text. > There's no reason that there couldn't be a Data.String.toUpper > corresponding to Data.Text.toUpper. That's true. But this isn't the point we were discussing. We were discussing whether the simplification of treating strings as a list is a good thing (from an educational perspective.) I pointer out that from a correctness perspective it's wrong. > I think Heinrich meant 20% performance in a useful program, not a > micro-benchmark. I that's what he meant and given that "useful program" isn't defined, so the 20% number is completely arbitrary. -- Johan _______________________________________________ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
