Excerpts from Duncan Coutts's message of Fri Dec 04 18:22:05 +0100 2009:
On Fri, 2009-12-04 at 01:19 +0000, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
No non-bottoming program has changed, but fewer programs fail now. I find it hard to imagine that anyone could have been relying on getting a crash here.
Making something more lazy can cause a memory leak.
To come back to the specifics of partitionEithers, is anyone arguing that, in this case, the original over-strictness is either intentional, or useful?
I don't think anyone is complaining about this specific case. I think we agree that the general principle is to make things lazy except where there are compelling reasons to do otherwise.
+1 (for a lazier partitionEithers, intersperse and intercalate) -- Nicolas Pouillard http://nicolaspouillard.fr