On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 12:32:21PM +0100, Christian Maeder wrote: > Yes, I support this proposal.
So do I. > Maybe the documentation to the "0rdered lists" section can be improved. > > Set.toAscList is not really necessary as it is the same as Set.toList. > In order to be a proper function, the result of Set.tolist must return a > sorted list without duplicates, since equal sets should yield equal > lists, if converted by Set.toList. It is still a proper function this way, you only don't get some nice axioms. > Returning a descending list is not necessary, because this can simply > be achieved by reversing, if needed. If the descending list is built lazily, you can get M highest elements of N element Set in O(M log N) time, which is nice. Using reverse, you would pay O(N log N). Best regards, Tom -- .signature: Too many levels of symbolic links _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
