Simon Marlow wrote:
[...] The intention was for the DData libraries to be placed directly under Data (i.e. Data.Set etc.). I had imagined that we would leave the old interfaces available too, deprecated, as long as the names didn't clash.
This would work, as I've already tested. Of course modulo possible clashes with the additional identifiers when those modules are imported as a whole, but I can't see a better migration path.
None of this precludes adding overloaded collections later; all we're doing here is adding some concrete data structures.
I really like to support Simon here: We need better support for some concrete basic data structures in the base package (in plain old Haskell98, of course). Waiting for consensus on *the* Grand Unified Framework (tm) will lead us nowhere, the design space is simply too large. If somebody thinks that he has solved all data structure/algorithm needs of the world, offer this SW as a separate package. Time will tell if people really adopt it, that's Open Source: Don't rely on marketing claims, but on evolution... :-) Cheers, S.