Feedback from an occasional Haskell user: I would use it. I've noticed that computational implementations of "transitive closure" often deviate from my (user-level) understanding of the standard mathematical definition. Specifically, self loops are often discarded. I assume/hope the math def will be used in haskell. A prominent example is Mathematica's TransitiveClosureGraph command. E.g., `TransitiveClosureGraph[{a -> b, b -> c, c -> a}]` has no self loops, even though `a` is clearly reachable from `a`, and TransitiveClosureGraph[{a -> a, b -> b, c -> c}]` is empty!) In the past networkx also had this flaw (although they indicated a plan to fix this; I'd have to recheck the current status). Cheers, Alan Isaac PS My apologies if I misread your post; I understood it to request user feedback, not just developer assessment. On 6/20/2019 8:00 AM, David wrote:
I just noticed that Data.Graph doesn't offer a transitive closure operation. Looking into implementing one, I discovered that doing so efficiently has been the subject of non-trivial research [*]. So if there's any demand, we should try to implement a reasonably efficient version in containers. Anybody want one?