What if we say that Enum a generalization, rather than a wrapper, of Int?
If the benchmarks are even, is there a reason to use the more specific
structure rather than the general one? I don't know if Enum being
"more complex" outweighs the benefits of it being "more general" (if
the EnumMap matches IntMap for speed).
Thoughts?
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 6:11 PM, Henning
Thielemann
On Sat, 8 Aug 2009, John Van Enk wrote:
That's originally how I was thinking about doing it, but I think that requires one to re-implement all the functions available in Data.IntMap as simple wrappers that do the toEnum/fromEnum conversion. I think making it into its own module is a little cleaner. The conversion from EnumMap to IntMap is substantially cleaner than from IntMap to EnumMap:
type IntMap v = EnumMap Int v
Can you implement EnumMap in terms of the Enum methods, without many conversions to Int? I mean, if you often convert to Int and back then you could achieve the same on top of IntMap. Generally I prefer the strategy "from simple to complex". I consider Enum to be a "wrapper" around Int. http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Simple_to_complex