[Haskell-cafe] ANNOUNCE: vector-bytestring-0.0.0.0

[Ertugrul Soeylemez]

Christian Maeder <Christian.Maeder at dfki.de> wrote:

> > So please, please, please, if you decide to use a newtype, do /not/
> > hide the constructor.
>
> The better alternative to "not hiding the constructor" is to supply
> conversion functions that may or may not do more than the constructor
> and selector and are named accordingly. (This just disallows pattern
> matching.)

Except annoying library users, what would be the point of that?

Please understand that as a middle level developer (abstractions,
protocol implementations, frameworks, etc.) I am sometimes annoyed by
the idealism of some library interfaces, and I find myself reinventing
the wheel very often, because the closed interfaces of some existing
libraries just don't support what I need, even though the technical
basis would be there, or because of the abstraction forest I'm unable to
guarantee or even get good performance.

I could totally understand having a black box interface for some higher
level stuff, but ByteString is still low/middle level and should support
me as a developer on that level.

Unifying vector and bytestring sounds like a great step, and I would
find it ruined already by wrapping it up in a newtype.  Hiding the
constructor would make this even worse.


Greets,
Ertugrul


-- 
nightmare = unsafePerformIO (getWrongWife >>= sex)
http://ertes.de/