partition

[matthewleon]

Returns a Tuple as in Haskell. See purescript/purescript-arrays#102

[matthewleon]

Just realized that there was a commented-out previous attempt at this. Have removed it in this PR.

[hdgarrood]

Most core libraries do tend to prefer records over tuples, as it is much easier to remember which part of the result is which this way. Thanks for this but I think I prefer it how it is now.

[hdgarrood]

Oh, didn't realise this function doesn't exist here yet! Okay yeah looks good except I think it would be better to use the same style as in arrays currently.

[matthewleon]

Okay, I'll adjust this accordingly. Thanks.

[matthewleon]

Should be good now.

[hdgarrood]

LGTM

[michaelficarra]

true and false might be better than yes and no.

[matthewleon]

true and false might be better than yes and no.

I am inclined to agree, but purescript-arrays sets a precedent here that I'm following. Are there any other packages that use a true/false convention?

[LiamGoodacre]

Btw what's the reason behind using reverse and foldl for strict lists?

Also, these were also added for lists in purescript-filterable not long ago :)

[garyb]

Btw what's the reason behind using reverse and foldl for strict lists?

Stack safety, if I remember rightly.

[LiamGoodacre]

Oh, looks like foldr is also defined by reverse and foldl 😄 https://github.com/purescript/purescript-lists/blob/master/src/Data/List/Types.purs#L68

[matthewleon]

Btw what's the reason behind using reverse and foldl for strict lists?

Also, these were also added for lists in purescript-filterable not long ago :)

Thanks @LiamGoodacre for this. I've basically copied your work over from purescript-filterable. I forgot about foldr being implemented in terms of foldl anyway, so it seems to me that your take on this one is indeed more elegant.

[paf31]

Thanks!