PROPOSAL: Add `disjoint` method to `Data.IntSet`
Joachim Breitner
mail at joachim-breitner.de
Tue Dec 19 15:01:54 UTC 2017
Hi,
Am Dienstag, den 19.12.2017, 13:44 +0100 schrieb Andreas Abel:
> +1 for "disjoint".
+1
> I think "overlaps" falls below the Fairbairn threshold.
✓
> I always
> wondered why there is a "notMember" function in the Set interface,
> saving us 3 key presses.
Probably because of use like this:
filter (`notMember` seen) todo -- pretty
vs.
filter (not . (`member` seen)) todo -- too many parenthesis.
Of course
filter (\x -> not (x `member` seen)) todo -- is also ok
And I will refrain from pointing out that with the idea of no-white-
space-means-higher-precedence[1] would allow
filter (not . `member`seen) todo -- too many parenthesis.
[1] https://www.joachim-breitner.de/blog/730-Less_parentheses
> One thing to consider: Data.Set should then also be equipped with a
> function "disjoint", to keep interfaces in sync.
✓
Cheers,
Joachim
--
Joachim Breitner
mail at joachim-breitner.de
http://www.joachim-breitner.de/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20171219/2c1ceb2a/attachment.sig>
More information about the Libraries
mailing list