Summary and call for discussion on text proposal

[Edward Kmett]

On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Malcolm Wallace <malcolm.wallace at me.com>wrote:
>
>  Option 3
>> --------
>>
>> breakStr :: Text           -> Text -> (Text, Text)
>> breakChr :: (Char -> Bool) -> Text -> (Text, Text)
>>
>> This give neither version the short name 'break', but gives both
>> reasonably short names with a suffix to indicate the character
>> predicate vs substring.
>>
>
> As a compromise between options 1 & 2, this option has merit.  It leaves
> open the possibility that the signatures of the short names might yet be
> decided at a later date.  If Bryan were willing to go with this option, I
> would certainly support it.
>
> +1. I too think Option 3 has merit, if only because it resolves the current
logjam, and still leaves open the possibility for consensus to be reached on
the short names at some point in the future without either side feeling
disadvantaged -- but do we really really have to randomly abbreviate Char
and String?

-Edward
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20101107/4a36557d/attachment.html