Simon Marlow wrote:
> ... "class String" anyone? :-)
I think I like the idea, but if we do this, do we lose the ability to
pattern-match strings? Or should we consider an automatic (or explicit)
conversion to [Char] when needed? Or some way to provide functions
(like snull, shead, stail) that would be automatically used when pattern
matching is needed?
If "class String" makes sense, why not "class List"? There have been
times when I wanted to block together list elements similarly to
packedStrings. Some of the same benefits can be gained from alternate
representations of [Int], for instance, as from [Char]. It doesn't seem
right to make Strings a special case.
Just a thought,
Matt Harden
