There is some precedent for 'sortOn' as the naming convention should we choose to go ahead with it.

http://lukepalmer.wordpress.com/2009/07/01/on-the-by-functions/

Having some mechanism by which we can explicitly request the Schwartzian transform like that as opposed to 'element by element' By functions strikes me personally as a good idea and sufficiently non-trivial to pass the "Fairbairn threshold" in my book.

+1 from me.

-Edward

On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 4:34 PM, <johnw@newartisans.com> wrote:

>>>>> Niklas Haas <haskell@nand.wakku.to> writes:

>> Oh yes, 'sortOn' is a really nice name. :)

> Huh, that name just reminded me of GHC.Exts.sortWith:

Either of the names sortOn, or sortWith, sound good.  I think I prefer
sortWith.

John

_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries

_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries