[Haskell-cafe] Announce: EnumMap-0.0.1

[John Van Enk]

What if we say that Enum a generalization, rather than a wrapper, of Int?

If the benchmarks are even, is there a reason to use the more specific
structure rather than the general one? I don't know if Enum being
"more complex" outweighs the benefits of it being "more general" (if
the EnumMap matches IntMap for speed).

Thoughts?

On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 6:11 PM, Henning
Thielemann<lemming at henning-thielemann.de> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 8 Aug 2009, John Van Enk wrote:
>
>> That's originally how I was thinking about doing it, but I think that
>> requires one to re-implement all the functions available in
>> Data.IntMap as simple wrappers that do the toEnum/fromEnum conversion.
>> I think making it into its own module is a little cleaner. The
>> conversion from EnumMap to IntMap is substantially cleaner than from
>> IntMap to EnumMap:
>>
>>> type IntMap v = EnumMap Int v
>
> Can you implement EnumMap in terms of the Enum methods, without many
> conversions to Int? I mean, if you often convert to Int and back then you
> could achieve the same on top of IntMap. Generally I prefer the strategy
> "from simple to complex". I consider Enum to be a "wrapper" around Int.
>  http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Simple_to_complex
>