[Haskell-cafe] Bytestrings vs String? parameters within package names?

[wren ng thornton]

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).

-- 
Live well,
~wren