Actually no. That's only a binding if you look at the source code. The sole C source code is only about 2-3 lines long with a "#include <Judy.h>" which isn't e

Actually no. That's only a binding if you look at the source code. The sole C source code is only about 2-3 lines long with a "#include <Judy.h>" which isn't even included while the haskell source is littered with foreign function calls. I discussed this issue with Don on my website a couple of months ago: http://www.codexon.com/posts/why-arent-functional-languages-like-haskell-and-ocaml-popular http://www.codexon.com/posts/why-arent-functional-languages-... and believe me, he would have told me if he really did have a completely reimplemented Judy array.