[m-rev.] for review: list_util and map_util

Simon Taylor stayl at cs.mu.OZ.AU
Fri Jun 13 18:30:18 AEST 2003

On 13-Jun-2003, Zoltan Somogyi <zs at cs.mu.OZ.AU> wrote:
> On 13-Jun-2003, Ralph Becket <rafe at cs.mu.OZ.AU> wrote:
> > I have no great problem with adding list_util.m and map_util.m, but I'd
> > like to hear a more detailed argument in favour of adding them.
> To reduce compilation times when a module uses only the basic functionality
> of list or map. To a letter extent, to make the interfaces of those two
> modules somewhat smaller, to reduce clutter and avoid scaring novices :-)

I vote against this change. I'd rather not be guessing whether
a predicate I want to use is in list or list_util.
I especially object to list.foldl, list.foldl2 and list.foldl3
not all being in the same module.

A better way to reduce compilation time would be to add predicate
table entries only for imported predicates and functions which are
potentially used. Smart recompilation provides some of the machinery
to do this.

mercury-reviews mailing list
post:  mercury-reviews at cs.mu.oz.au
administrative address: owner-mercury-reviews at cs.mu.oz.au
unsubscribe: Address: mercury-reviews-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: unsubscribe
subscribe:   Address: mercury-reviews-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: subscribe

More information about the reviews mailing list