On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Tyson Whitehead
<twhitehead@gmail.com> wrote:
On March 16, 2010 09:29:06 Louis Wasserman wrote:
> I'd like to request some more feedback on the
> proposed<http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/3909>implementation
> for priority queues in containers. Mostly, I feel like
> adding a new module to containers should be contentious, and there hasn't
> been as much griping or contention as I expected. The silence is feeling
> kind of eerie!
Not sure if this is an appropriate question at all as I haven't looked at the
code, but would it be possible to put any primary functionality into a class.
I'm thinking something along the lines of how the vector code works. This
allows you to use all the higher-order functions (i.e., those implemented
using the primary functions) on a different underlying implementation.
I've found this particularly useful in wrapping Perl data types. For the Perl
array, all I had to do was write an class instance for the vector module, and
I have all these higher-order functions I could use from existing code.
It would be very nice to have had something similar to do for the hash tables.
Even to just provide a "native haskell" immutable look into the data so
Haskell code can extract the components it needs with standard functions.
Cheers! -Tyson
PS: I'm still working on the wrapping, so I might change my mind as to how
useful this really is, but thought I should throw it out there.