Proposal: priority queues in containers

Louis Wasserman wasserman.louis at
Thu Mar 18 20:50:25 EDT 2010

Okay, let me ask the following question:

Would anybody besides me be heartbroken if priority queues *weren't* put
into containers, but were instead put into the Platform?

Louis Wasserman
wasserman.louis at

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 6:50 PM, Thomas Schilling
<nominolo at>wrote:

> On 18 March 2010 22:02, Louis Wasserman <wasserman.louis at> wrote:
> > I'm still pretty strongly in favor of putting priority queues into
> > containers: other programming languages consider it necessary for
> inclusion
> > into standardized libraries, people will be more likely to use
> appropriate
> > data structures for their needs when reliable, friendly implementations
> are
> > already at their fingertips, and other reasons already discussed.
> The Haskell Platform is really is intended to be available at your
> fingertips.  Unfortunately, the following does not work (although I
> thought it's supposed to)
>     $ cabal install haskell-platform
> Nevertheless, the libraries bundled with GHC are those libraries that
> GHC itself needs and which therefore cannot be upgraded independently.
>  The real standard libraries are the Haskell Platform and if your
> package is part of the platform, then your package *is* in status
> equivalent to things like java.util.*.
> This weekend's Hackathon in Zürich will partly be dedicated to getting
> the next release of the Platform release ready.  If you can get your
> package into the following platform release (due 6 months after the
> current release), then this would surely make it the default package
> for anyone in need of a PQ.
> / Thomas
> --
> Push the envelope.  Watch it bend.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list