[Haskell-cafe] Adding a builder to the "bytestring" package?
michael at snoyman.com
Wed Jan 19 20:37:11 CET 2011
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 9:32 PM, Johan Tibell <johan.tibell at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 6:51 PM, John Millikin <jmillikin at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Most people who work with binary data have had to construct
>> bytestrings at some point. The most common solution is to use a
>> "Builder", a monoid representing how to construct a bytestring. There
>> are currently three packages (that I know of) which include builder
>> implementations: binary, cereal, and blaze-builder.
>> However, all of these libraries have additional dependencies beyond
>> just "bytestring". All three depend on "array" and "containers", and
>> blaze-builder additionally depends on "text" (and thus "deepseq").
>> Since the current implementation of GHC uses static linking, every
>> additional dependency adds to the final size of a binary.
>> Obviously the "Builder" concept is very useful, as it has been
>> implemented at least three times. How about adding it to the
>> "bytestring" package itself? We could have a module
>> Data.ByteString.Builder, with functions (at minimum):
>> toByteString :: Builder -> Data.ByteString.ByteString
>> toLazyByteString :: Builder -> Data.ByteString.Lazy.ByteString
>> fromByteString :: Data.ByteString.ByteString -> Builder
>> fromLazyByteString :: Data.ByteString.Lazy.ByteString -> Builder
>> empty :: Builder
>> append :: Builder -> Builder -> Builder
>> Plus whatever implementation details might be useful to expose.
>> Existing libraries could then add their extra features (word ->
>> builder for binary and cereal, UTF/HTTP for blaze-builder) on top of
>> the existing types.
>> Is this something the community is interested in? Is there any work
>> currently aimed at this goal?
> I think both Duncan and I agree that we should move
> Data.Binary.Builder (which doesn't have any extra dependencies) to
> bytestring. I've already added Data.Text.Lazy.Builder to text.
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
Isn't Simon Meier working on migrating his code from blaze-builder
into binary? I agree with John that it would make more sense to go in
bytestring. Assuming that happens, would the builder from text end up
being based on it?
More information about the Haskell-Cafe