[Haskell-cafe] Bytestrings vs String? parameters within package
wren ng thornton
wren at freegeek.org
Tue Feb 3 16:12:52 EST 2009
Marc Weber wrote:
> wren ng thornton wrote:
> > I'd just stick with one (with a module for hiding the conversions, as
> > desired). Duplicating the code introduces too much room for maintenance and
> > compatibility issues.
> > That's the big thing. The more people that use ByteStrings the less need
> > there is to convert when combining libraries. That said, ByteStrings aren't
> > a panacea; lists and laziness are very useful.
> Hi wren,
> In the second paragraph you agree that there will be less onversion when
> using only one type of strings.
> You're also right about encoding.
> About laziness you'r partially right: There is also Bytestring.Lazy
> which is a basically a list of (non lazy) Bytestring
Sure, but lazy bytestrings are still chunk-wise strict. Sometimes even
that isn't lazy enough (more often with non-string kinds of lists, granted).
More information about the Haskell-Cafe