Andreas, you seem to be mistaken there'd only be one container API? But there's several container APIs besides "Data.Set" which provide some collection of elements!

https://hackage.haskell.org/package/dlist-0.8.0.7/docs/Data-DList.html#v:cons

https://hackage.haskell.org/package/dlist-0.8.0.7/docs/Data-DList.html#v:append

https://hackage.haskell.org/package/text-1.2.4.0/docs/Data-Text.html#v:cons

https://hackage.haskell.org/package/text-1.2.4.0/docs/Data-Text.html#v:append

http://hackage.haskell.org/package/vector-0.12.0.3/docs/Data-Vector.html#v:cons

https://hackage.haskell.org/package/bytestring-0.10.10.0/docs/Data-ByteString.html#v:cons

https://hackage.haskell.org/package/bytestring-0.10.10.0/docs/Data-ByteString.html#v:append

Am Mo., 19. Aug. 2019 um 08:16 Uhr schrieb Andreas Abel <andreas.abel@ifi.lmu.de>:
Helmut, do you actually know the container APIs?

Show me cons and append in Data.Set!

On 2019-08-18 19:40, Helmut Schmidt wrote:
>
>
> Am So., 18. Aug. 2019 um 17:17 Uhr schrieb Oliver Charles
> <ollie@ocharles.org.uk <mailto:ollie@ocharles.org.uk>>:
>
>     On Sun, 18 Aug 2019, 5:47 pm Helmut Schmidt,
>     <helmut.schmidt.4711@gmail.com
>     <mailto:helmut.schmidt.4711@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>         All these philosophical arguments calling for "consistency" with
>         the container APIs or that function need words for the human
>         mind to comprehend seem short-sighted to me. If we were
>         consistent about the proposal itself we'd also demand to add
>
>            cons = (:)
>
>            empty = []
>
>            toList = id
>
>            fromList = id
>
>
>     I honestly have no problem with any of these.
>
>
> I forgot
>
>      append = (++)
>
> We also need to address another elephant in the room... those pesky
> tuples and their special privileged non-wordy syntax!
>
>     pair = (,)
>
>     triple = (,,)
>
>     quadruple = (,,,)
>
>     quituple = (,,,,)
>
>     sextuple = (,,,,,)
>
>     septuble = (,,,,,,)
>
>     octuple = (,,,,,,,)
>
> If Haskell were invented in this century's EU Haskell source code would
> be littered with €s instead of $s but then again I wonder why £ wasn't
> picked. But I digress. We can kill two birds with one stone here:
>
>     apply = ($)
>
>     strictApply = ($!)
>
>     compose = (.)
>
>
> It's fun to imagine how code using those definitions would like! But
> it's still a -1 for me, sorry!
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Libraries mailing list
> Libraries@haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
>