On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 5:21 PM, wren ng thornton <wren@community.haskell.org> wrote:

Text: break :: Text ->  Text ->  (Text, Text)
      breakBy :: (Char ->  Bool) ->  Text ->  (Text, Text)

One consistency problem I see with this is that the ByteString versions permit breaking on a disjunctive pattern (e.g., \c -> c=='a' || c=='q') whereas the Text version would require multiple passes to perform these queries, since it takes a Text instead of a (Text->Bool).

See breakBy in the email you quoted.
 
Other than that, I do agree with the philosophy of the "deliberate and sensible" differences. Though, given the philosophy that these aren't Char-wise operations, why does Text.breakBy accept a (Char->Bool)? Is this just an optimization for common cases like breaking on Unicode-defined whitespace codepoints?

I kept breakBy in there because it is actually useful. I changed its name because it's by far less common than "I want to break on a string".