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.
Joachim Breitner <mail@joachim-breitner.de> writes:When I first made the package, there was a lot of resistance to the idea
> 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?
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.
I haven't been active in Haskell-land for a while and I'm not sure I
> Jed, would you be interested in getting a proper
> http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Library_submissions process on the
> way?
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
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries