
+1 On 02/25/2013 03:47 AM, Edward Kmett wrote:
I for one would be a +1 for just putting the instance in. If someone really needs an alternative encoding to the one every one else uses they could use a newtype. That is what they are for.
On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 9:00 AM, Jed Brown
mailto:jed@59a2.org> wrote: Joachim Breitner
mailto:mail@joachim-breitner.de> writes: > Hi, > > I noticed http://hackage.haskell.org/package/storable-complex on > hackage. To avoid library proliferation, is there a chance to get this > instance into base?
When I first made the package, there was a lot of resistance to the idea on the grounds that there were other representations for complex values, therefore it was not something to standardize. The mere practicality that C, C++, and Fortran all chose the same representation for their native complex type was not considered to be convincing at that time. MATLAB, for example, chose a different representation, though it really only works to represent arrays of complex.
> Jed, would you be interested in getting a proper > http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Library_submissions process on the > way?
I haven't been active in Haskell-land for a while and I'm not sure I have time to lead the effort on this front. I think it would be useful to move the instance to base and I'm happy to help out as needed.
_______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org mailto:Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
_______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries