[Haskell] Re: Data.Set whishes

[Koen Claessen]

 | http://www.haskell.org/hierarchical-modules/libraries/library-design.html

I have always wondered why the module system is not used at
all in these conventions. I mean, the function names seem to
come straight from the Haskell 1.2 days when there was no
module system!

What I mean is, instead of:

  newIORef, writeIORef, readIORef

We could have:

  IORef.new, IORef.write, IORef.read

(Or: new, write, read if all we use are IORefs.)

And instead of:

  mapSet, emptySet, ...

We have:

  Set.map, Set.empty, ...

This is how Chris does it in Edison.

Why isn't this used more?

/Koen

--
Koen Claessen        http://www.cs.chalmers.se/~koen/
Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden