Proposal: priority queues in containers
fox at ucw.cz
Thu Mar 18 17:39:33 EDT 2010
> I don't like libraries getting bigger, I like them getting smaller.
> When they're smaller they're easier to understand and easier to upgrade.
> So I would also advice proposing your package for the HP (Haskell Platform).
> I'm even for splitting containers into sub-packages: maps, sets,
> sequence, graph and tree. Those sub-packages would then need to be
> added to the HP.
> Then we could turn containers into a meta-package that depends on
> these sub-packages (similar to how the HP works).
> Finally we could deprecate containers and after some time remove it.
> (I'm also for splitting base even more... but one thing at a time)
personally I am against splitting containers. It is a collection of
several basic data structures with similar design decisions
(reasonably efficient, can be used persistently, decent API).
I think these structures should stay together, to have a library of data
structures for common usage.
I am for adding the priority queues to the containers.
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users