Stefan O'Rear
What does Data. mean in a language where almost everything is a data type?
And I thought in Haskell almost everything was a function...
I think we should move abolish that subtree entirely, moving the major subtrees (Binary, Generics, Array, ...) to top level, and creating a bunch of new categories (Numeric, Collection, etc) for the remaining modules. (ByteString can go in Text)
I couldn't disagree more strongly. _Very_ few libraries are about providing general-purpose data structures. The vast majority of libraries are task-oriented: OpenGL for graphical rendering, HaXml/HXT/pretty for document processing, HUnit/QuickCheck for testing, process/unix/win32/filepath/directory for accessing OS facilities, the list goes on. Looking at http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/libraries/index.html the Data.* hierarchy is a mere 2/11th of the modules listed (which admittedly covers only a tiny selection of packages available, but these are the ones distributed with ghc). Regards, Malcolm