Henning Thielemann <schlepp...@henning-thielemann.de> writes: > Heinrich Apfelmus schrieb: > >> Ivan Miljenovic wrote: > >>> I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here: first you said you >>> wanted to be able to specify a vertex type, now you're saying that you >>> don't want to know what the vertex type even is (except that it's some >>> abstract Node type)? Whilst this would make graph usage safer/more >>> robust, this seems to contradict your earlier arguments... >> >> I'd be happy with either one. :) In both cases, I want to specify a >> custom vertex type. >> >> I can either do that directly if the library permits, though I think the >> solution with associated types is too cumbersome to be useful for my >> make example. >> >> Or I get an abstract Node type and the library provides just the right >> functions that make it easy to manage a custom vertex type myself. I had >> hoped that the Data.Graph.Inductive.NodeMap module provides this, >> which it doesn't. >> >> In other words, the abstractness of Node forces the library to provide >> a well-designed set of functions to work with them, and that's what I'm >> after. In my make example, I spent the most time thinking about how to >> manage the Int nodes, finally settling with Data.Map.findIndex , and >> I prefer the library to think about that for me. > > Full acknowledge!
I have no idea what this is meant to mean... -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
