Re: Proposal: improve the Data.Tree API

OK. That sounds fine by me. Milan? On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 1:10 PM, João Cristóvão wrote:

I'm with Sean here,

In Data.Map, for example, the lookup function returns the type Maybe a, not Data.Map k a. And find, in Data.Foldable (for which Tree has an instance) also returns a Maybe a.

But the lookupTree/findTree/lookupTreeInForest functions return Maybe (Tree a), thus I added the final 'Tree' in the name.

The only function name where that did not apply was filter, since (for example) for lists the filter function also returns the type of the original container, not the inner type.

This was the rationale I followed. I'm afraid that renaming findTree to findBy will be confusing, as it seems that you just provide a 'evaluator function', but still return the inner type a (like find), instead of the (actual) Tree a.

Cheers, João

2014-02-27 15:27 GMT+00:00 Daniel Trstenjak :

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 03:05:00PM +0100, Henning Thielemann wrote:

...

...

Yes please, but I already got lots of resistance for a qualifiable name in Data.Bits.

I really think that 'Data.Bits' is a bit special in this regard with all of its functions, which are often used with back ticks and importing all of them explicitely is really a bit annoying.

Otherwise I'm with you :).

Greetings, Daniel _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries

_______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries