On Mon, 29 Sep 2008, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
On 2008 Sep 29, at 19:40, Alexander Dunlap wrote:
Well, yes, but presumably different compilers could optimize in different ways. (Perhaps they could use some class behind the scenes, or their own optimizing mechanism?) My point is that we shouldn't have multiple exposed functions for _exactly_ the same semantic operation.
Tell it to the Prelude. (^), (^^), (**) anyone?
I don't see the relation between the different kind of powers and the different implementations of 'nub'. As far as I understand 'nubInt' is just an optimization of the generic 'nub'. In contrast to that, the three power operators denote really different operations: http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Power_function I think it is reasonable to drop in an optimized 'nub' for certain types by an optimizer rule, just like it is legitimate to drop in a special GSL function for (GSLMatrix.map sin), or a determinant algorithm for Double matrices which uses division, whereas the generic determinant computation does not need divisions.