Re: Strict folds without base case to `Data.Foldable`.

> Since there is no `foldl1'` class method to override, no structures
> have a specialised definition.  Therefore, a "default" definition
> can be written outside the class …

I know, Viktor. I have already written a definition very similar to
yours. I even said in my first message that the implementation is
trivial. The question is whether I should accept that patching over
deficiencies of `base` is normal.

> P.S.  FWIW, apologies if I am misreading the tone of your message, but
> it does sound "demanding" to me.  GHC is a free community project …

This is exactly why I am still here. Even though I have seen good and
worthy proposals drowned in endless pondering over minutiae. Do I want
to help improve the common goods? Yes. Am I happy with how it has been
going so far? No.

> … with
> no large corporation invested in its development, all the contributors
> want to help users, but this is easier to help users who are considerate
> of those to would volunteer their time to help.

This is not about _«help»_. I am not asking for help. I have technical
requirements from a certain library, here `base`. I made the
maintainers aware of these requirements. I cannot force the
maintainers to improve the library, the maintainers cannot cancel my
requirement.
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries