[Haskell] Re: Data.Set whishes
lennart at augustsson.net
Fri Feb 20 10:27:39 EST 2004
I think it's because of tradition. Originally Haskell didn't have
qualified names, only renaming. (Which, IMHO, was a wrong decision
in the original Haskell design.)
Koen Claessen wrote:
> | 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 Claessen http://www.cs.chalmers.se/~koen/
> Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden
> Haskell mailing list
> Haskell at haskell.org
More information about the Haskell