On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 12:48 AM, Michael Snoyman mich...@snoyman.comwrote:
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 2:37 AM, John Lato jwl...@gmail.com wrote:
I didn't see this message and replied privately to Michael earlier, so
I'm replicating my comments here.
Sorry about that, I wrote to you
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 10:34 AM, John Lato jwl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 12:48 AM, Michael Snoyman mich...@snoyman.comwrote:
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 2:37 AM, John Lato jwl...@gmail.com wrote:
I didn't see this message and replied privately to Michael earlier, so
I'm
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 4:57 AM, Michael Snoyman mich...@snoyman.comwrote:
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 10:34 AM, John Lato jwl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 12:48 AM, Michael Snoyman mich...@snoyman.comwrote:
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 2:37 AM, John Lato jwl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 4:25 AM, John Lato jwl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 4:57 AM, Michael Snoyman mich...@snoyman.comwrote:
I think I just made a bad assumption about what you were proposing. If I
was going to introduce a typeclass like this, I'd want it to support `Set`,
On 09/13/13 01:51, Michael Snoyman wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 5:38 AM, Mario Blažević blama...@acanac.net
mailto:blama...@acanac.net wrote:
On 09/11/13 19:37, John Lato wrote:
3. I'm not entirely sure that the length* functions belong
here. I
understand why,
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Mario Blažević blama...@acanac.net wrote:
On 09/13/13 01:51, Michael Snoyman wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 5:38 AM, Mario Blažević blama...@acanac.netmailto:
blama...@acanac.net wrote:
On 09/11/13 19:37, John Lato wrote:
3. I'm not entirely
On 09/13/13 02:28, Michael Snoyman wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Mario Blažević blama...@acanac.net
mailto:blama...@acanac.net wrote:
On 09/13/13 01:51, Michael Snoyman wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 5:38 AM, Mario Blažević
blama...@acanac.net
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Mario Blažević blama...@acanac.netwrote:
On 09/13/13 02:28, Michael Snoyman wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Mario Blažević blama...@acanac.netmailto:
blama...@acanac.net wrote:
On 09/13/13 01:51, Michael Snoyman wrote:
On Fri,
On 09/11/13 19:37, John Lato wrote:
I didn't see this message and replied privately to Michael earlier, so
I'm replicating my comments here.
1. Sooner or later I expect you'll want something like this:
class LooseMap c el el' where
lMap :: (el - el') - c el - c el'
It covers the case of
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 2:37 AM, John Lato jwl...@gmail.com wrote:
I didn't see this message and replied privately to Michael earlier, so I'm
replicating my comments here.
Sorry about that, I wrote to you privately first and then thought this
might be a good discussion for the cafe.
1.
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 5:38 AM, Mario Blažević blama...@acanac.net wrote:
On 09/11/13 19:37, John Lato wrote:
I didn't see this message and replied privately to Michael earlier, so
I'm replicating my comments here.
1. Sooner or later I expect you'll want something like this:
class
That's really funny timing. I started work on a very similar project just
this week:
https://github.com/snoyberg/mono-traversable
It's not refined yet, which is why I haven't discussed it too publicly, but
it's probably at the point where some review would make sense. There's been
a bit of a
I didn't see this message and replied privately to Michael earlier, so I'm
replicating my comments here.
1. Sooner or later I expect you'll want something like this:
class LooseMap c el el' where
lMap :: (el - el') - c el - c el'
It covers the case of things like hashmaps/unboxed vectors
13 matches
Mail list logo
