[reactive] splitE => partitionE

[David Sankel]

Would partitionE be a better name for splitE? I'm thinking that splitE could
be a more general function that doesn't chop off the right hand side of an
event.  My proposal, by example:

partitionE [(0,()), (5,())]
           [(2,()), (4,()), (6,()), (8,()), (10,())]
  => [ (0, ((), [(2,()), (4,())] ))
     , (5, ((), [(6,()), (8,()), (10,())]))
     ]

splitE [(0,()), (5,())]
       [(2,()), (4,()), (6,()), (8,()), (10,())]
  => [ (0, ((), [(2,()), (4,()), (6,()), (8,()), (10,())]))
     , (5, ((), [(6,()), (8,()), (10,())]))
     ]

Any objections?

David

-- 
David Sankel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/reactive/attachments/20081202/e4097ef4/attachment-0001.htm