James Gallicchio
James Gallicchio
Can also then implement generic `sum`, `prod`, `max`, `min` based on it
If we generalize #5 to cover nonempty collections, then we may also want `reduce : C -> (t -> t) -> t`. I'm imagining it could also be implemented generically...
I haven't yet checked what Haskell libraries do. Could be a useful source.
Gonna wait until the 4.8 release to add a `Map` class, so the deprecation notice sticks around for at least a little while.
hm, this makes sense; for now I think I'll remove the notation. when I want it again I'll try copying the getElem elaborator to see what it does.
Need to add deprecation notices to all the names that have been changed (eek)
I suspect it should be a separate type. I'm happy to maintain this amount of duplicate code, and most of the duplication should be avoidable by making `IndexType` do the...
do these definitions need any of `reducible, inline, always_inline`?
Syntax bikeshedding: I'm a bit confused why the syntax for exclusive lower bound uses `>`. I expected `a there? Otherwise I would be very happy to see this implemented! :smile: