Re: Generalizing some type signatures involving Int

This is perhaps not the right place, but if there are benchmarks proving that genericLength is slower than it should be, it should be easy to add a SPECIALIZE pragma. On 11/13/18 9:13 PM, David Feuer wrote:

genericLength is extremely inefficient for typical numeric types. Int is a rather sad type for these things; it really should be Word. But that may not be worth fixing.

On Tue, Nov 13, 2018, 9:51 PM Evan Laforge mailto:qdunkan@gmail.com wrote:

You can already get these as Data.List.genericLength and Data.List.genericReplicate

As for changing the prelude ones, this would probably cause a lot of busywork.  Where I work we compile with -Werror and -Wtype-defaults, so a lot of places might have to get type annotations. On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 5:19 PM Vanessa McHale mailto:vanessa.mchale@iohk.io> wrote: > > Would it be possible to generalize replicate and length to have type > signatures > > replicate :: Integral a => a -> b -> [b] > > and > > length :: (Integral a, Foldable t) => t b -> a > > ? > > There have been a few instances where such a thing would have been > useful to me. > > Cheers > > > _______________________________________________ > Libraries mailing list > Libraries@haskell.org mailto:Libraries@haskell.org > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org mailto:Libraries@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries