RE: Proposal: keep Data.Map.foldWithKey

Gregory Collins wrote:

On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 8:12 PM, Christian Maeder wrote:

...

Asking for support again (or withdrawals of "no"s)

So if the vote/discussion doesn't go as you like, you bring it up again until people are too tired to argue with you anymore?

Still no from me. My preferred resolution would be to remove foldWithKey from Intmap also. And I point to this thread as an example of the morass that is our current libraries process :(

This isn't aimed at you specifically, but I suggest that if someone objects to a proposal on the grounds that an alternative route is better, they should actually propose that so that we can have a proper debate between the alternatives. Removing foldWithKey from IntMap would (arguably) require foldrWithKey and foldlWithKey to be exposed instead. It seems Milan raised this in http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/2010-September/014410.html and there was no objection, but nothing further was done. Previous to that there was apparently a patch in http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/3999 - it seems to have been proposed in http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/2010-April/013541.html without objections, but was never applied and I suspect the code has moved on enough that it can't just be applied as is any more. If we do nothing at all, then we have a situation that is (IMO) worse than either going back or going forwards. If noone wants to push through the changes that are needed to move forwards, we should go back until someone is ready. Cheers, Ganesh =============================================================================== Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer: http://www.credit-suisse.com/legal/en/disclaimer_email_ib.html ===============================================================================