Sun, 5 Dec 1999 17:46:57 +0300 (MSK), S.D.Mechveliani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pisze:
> Is not deleteBy :: (a->Bool) -> [a] -> [a]
> more natural for the library than
> deleteBy :: (a->a->Bool) -> a -> [a] -> [a]
> ?
Possibly, but then IMHO it should not be called deleteBy, which
is a variant of delete with comparison given explicitly instead
of through the Eq class.
--
__("< Marcin Kowalczyk * [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://qrczak.ids.net.pl/
\__/ GCS/M d- s+:-- a22 C+++>+++$ UL++>++++$ P+++ L++>++++$ E-
^^ W++ N+++ o? K? w(---) O? M- V? PS-- PE++ Y? PGP->+ t
QRCZAK 5? X- R tv-- b+>++ DI D- G+ e>++++ h! r--%>++ y-
