TheMatten
TheMatten
BTW, Happy let's you export multiple parsers these days, and it can report expected tokens (output may need some tidying, but it is doable).
It doesn't actually add corresponding functions to `Data.Text.Lazy` - while I guess that doesn't really matter for this specific PR, it means that #244 isn't technically fully resolved. I can...
Looking at `breakOnEnd`, would similar implementation using `reverse` make sense? I'm not familiar enough with performance characteristics of `text` to tell whether it would break existing optimizations.
I've locally prepared commit with ```hs -- | /O(n)/ Similar to 'break', but searches from the end of the string. -- -- >>> T.breakEnd (=='0') "180cm" -- ("180","cm") breakEnd ::...
@Bodigrim no problem. Should I include mentioned `Lazy` versions too?
Oops, sorry, I forgot to upload changes - will do so today.
Should I rebase it on current master?
I've rebased on top of current `master`.
Sure :+1: Yeah, they're nice - other options to consider would be hand-rolled polymoprhic traversals (used by PureScript) and `Data`/`syb` (used by GHC). I guess I would be fine with...
- BTW, maybe `optics` could potentially work well for substitution/inspection-like things?