Re: Summary and call for discussion on text proposal

As a platform user and library developer, I'd rather that high-quality libraries like text be included in the platform than not, even if the naming conventions are slightly different. It isn't that hard to learn the naming quirks of various libraries, and it means I can rely on the library being present in a much wider collection of haskell installations. Given the distributed nature of the development of the Haskell libraries that go into the platform, they are never going to be as coherent as they might be if a small team of people wrote all of them. But then, the scope would be much smaller and the usefulness correspondingly less. Just my two cents. Kathleen On Nov 7, 2010, at 3:24 PM, Gregory Collins wrote:

On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 12:09 AM, Roman Leshchinskiy wrote:

...

Packages where the first argument is a predicate (in the order that Hayoo shows them):

[...super-long list...]

Packages where the first argument is something else:

text

Bryan is obviously not unaware of the prior art and has explained his rationale. There is a crucial distinction between those other examples and text, namely that those other containers are intended to work element-wise and text isn't.

I fear I am contributing to the bureaucratic paper-shuffling I've been complaining about -- I think my vote is clear and I'll be bowing out of the discussion now.

G -- Gregory Collins _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries