On 12/15/11 12:38 PM, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
| Am Montag, den 12.12.2011, 15:37 -0500 schrieb wren ng thornton:
| I've noticed that take and filter are good producers (and consumers)
| for list fusion, but takeWhile, drop, and dropWhile are not. Is there
| any reason for this discrepancy?
On 12/17/11 6:42 AM, Joachim Breitner wrote:
Dear Wren,
Am Donnerstag, den 15.12.2011, 17:38 + schrieb Simon Peyton-Jones:
| Am Montag, den 12.12.2011, 15:37 -0500 schrieb wren ng thornton:
| I've noticed that take and filter are good producers (and consumers)
| for list fusion, but
Dear Wren,
Am Donnerstag, den 15.12.2011, 17:38 + schrieb Simon Peyton-Jones:
| Am Montag, den 12.12.2011, 15:37 -0500 schrieb wren ng thornton:
| I've noticed that take and filter are good producers (and consumers)
| for list fusion, but takeWhile, drop, and dropWhile are not. Is there
| Am Montag, den 12.12.2011, 15:37 -0500 schrieb wren ng thornton:
| I've noticed that take and filter are good producers (and consumers)
| for list fusion, but takeWhile, drop, and dropWhile are not. Is there
| any reason for this discrepancy?
|
| If not, would I need to go through the
I've noticed that take and filter are good producers (and consumers) for
list fusion, but takeWhile, drop, and dropWhile are not. Is there any
reason for this discrepancy?
If not, would I need to go through the libraries@ process for fixing it,
or should I just submit a patch?
--
Live well,
Hi,
Am Montag, den 12.12.2011, 15:37 -0500 schrieb wren ng thornton:
I've noticed that take and filter are good producers (and consumers) for
list fusion, but takeWhile, drop, and dropWhile are not. Is there any
reason for this discrepancy?
If not, would I need to go through the