On Jan 3, 2010, at 1:03 AM, Cale Gibbard wrote:
nubBy' (y:ys) xs | elem_by eq y xs = nubBy' ys xs
I wonder why the author of this code did not use "any (eq y)" instead of "elem_by eq y" as "elem_by" is not exported anyway. Does "elem_by" compile to more efficient code? The version with "any" could be "fixed" (made equivalent to the report version) easily by using "any (`eq` y)". The comment on "elem_by" gives me the impression that the semantics of "nubBy" was changed by accident in the new version and I agree that it should be fixed. Or maybe the semantics was changed on purpose in order to annoy people that ignore the precondition that Cale proposes to relax (; +1 for the relaxation. Cheers, Sebastian -- Underestimating the novelty of the future is a time-honored tradition. (D.G.)