Soliciting Comments on DSP Library

[Matthew Donadio]

Simon Marlow wrote:
> Then I'm happy for your library to be the reference for the DSP
> hierarchy.  Unless there are any objections, I'll add that to the list.

Cool.

> ... 
> I'd go with the longer names.
> ...
> Agreed.  The choice about whether to put Statistics at the top level or
> not depends on whether it is likely to evolve into a deep hierarchy
> itself; if not, then Numeric.Statistics should be fine.
> ...
> In this case there might be better names though -
> Numeric.Random.Distribution sounds good to me.

I am going to make the naming changes mentioned in the last few emails
in this thread.  The potential names can be found at

	http://users.snip.net/~donadio/haskell/proposal.html

On question, though.  Is it better to have a flat hierarchy, or a
descriptive, but deep one?

For example, I currently have

	DSP
	  IIR
	  FIR

Is it better to have

	DSP
	  Filter
	    IIR
	    FIR

so that as I implement other filtering modules, such as Adaptive and
Homomorphic, they have a "proper" home and be grouped together?

Thanks.

-- 
Matthew Donadio (m.p.donadio@ieee.org)