Adding `traverse` and `for` to Data.Set seems like a good idea.
I am not convinced about adding mapM and forM if there's no
performance benefit to those versions. I'd rather not see that
redundancy proliferate without good reason. In base, I would like to
see those functions reduced to aliases per this thread [1], but that's
waiting on [2].
[1] https://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/2015-May/025708.html
[2] https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/issues/10071
Cheers,
George
On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 at 10:40, hasufell@posteo.de
This was posted a year ago already, but without many comments: https://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/2019-January/029335.html
So after cleaning up the PR a bit, adding tests and benchmarks, let's give it another go.
PR is at: https://github.com/haskell/containers/pull/592
New functions are: forM, mapM, for, traverse
This follows the other Data.Set exported functions, overwriting Prelude ones like foldr etc, so I think that's exactly what we want.
Cheers, Julian Ospald _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries