On 8 Sep, George Russell wrote:
> Don't add more functions like concatSep to the standard library or prelude.
Certainly not to the prelude, but I think there is a strong case for
evolving the standard library based on what people use. I use
((concat .) intersperse) quite a lot, and having a standard name for
it would be a good thing. concatWith would be another possible name.
> Instead document what is there better.
Both.
> (1) document the IO functions in one place
Hear hear. One might argue that the definitions ought to be in the
same module, too. I'd prefer a structure where there was a prelude
that contained next to nothing (just the stuff that the language
itself depends on) and libraries, together with a 'standard library'
that includes the stuff from each of these libraries that are at
present in the prelude. Most beginners programmes might have to start
with
> import UsualStuff
but that's a small price to pay.
> (2) document all functions with some text
hear hear.
> (3) there should be an index of all functions,
hear hear.
> (4) Haskell implementors should be encouraged to modify the library report by adding
> their own functions and comments directly into the main text.
I'd rather see:
(4) Haskell implementors should be encouraged to implement exactly the
library report and confine deviations to separate (well documented)
libraries.
Jón
--
Jón Fairbairn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
