Proposal: add conversion functions to Data.Fixed.

Ashley Yakeley ashley at
Sun Dec 2 10:55:51 CET 2012

On 02/12/12 01:25, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:
> Edward Kmett <ekmett at> writes:
>> To be frank, I would just rather have access to the constructor to Fixed.
>> It honestly strikes me as silly to have to pay for a division and/or
>> multiplication every time I want to access one.
>> There in an ideological distinction being maintained here about the one
>> true usage pattern that has forced me to reimplement Data.Fixed in my own
>> code to avoid the overhead. =(
> Fwiw, I've sometimes wanted to have 'Int' based fixed-precision
> arithmetic, and the current Data.Fixed allows only for "big-num" based
> fixed-precision types.
> Just a thought: Why does Data.Fixed have to be in 'base' anyway if the
> interface doesn't seem to be agreed upon by everyone? Can't we split it
> off into a separate package where it can more easily evolve into a
> richer API?

+1 to both of these ideas.

-- Ashley

More information about the Libraries mailing list