URI handling code; proposed Network.URI replacement

Graham Klyne gk at ninebynine.org
Tue Feb 24 15:56:38 EST 2004

At 13:07 24/02/04 +0000, Simon Marlow wrote:
> > I've completed the functionality of my proposed upgrade to
> > Network.URI,
> > though there are still a couple of issues that need to be
> > resolved with the
> > ongoing RFC2396bis work (none critical to the general
> > functionality).  This
> > is still work-in-progress, but I'm airing it now to see if
> > folks think it's
> > an acceptable upgrade to the existing Network.URI module.
>Sorry for not replying on this topic sooner.
>I've taken a look at your replacement URI, and it looks great.  The
>Haddock markup needs a little cleanup, but the interface looks fine.

Thanks.  (I've started trying to apply Haddock markup in my own code, but 
I've not yet got round to actually generating the docs from it.)

>Since it's mostly backwards compatible, there's no issue with upgrading
>it in place.  (well, there's one small issue: it introduces a dependency
>from the network package on the parsec package, but that's not a big

Hmmm... Parsec is pretty central to what I've done.

>We'll arrange for CVS access so you can commit your new version to the


Another detail.  Do you have a preferred form of licence for this.  I've 
been putting my own applications out as GPL to date, but I imagine that the 
viral effect would be problematic for the compiler library.  I'm happy to 
use any reasonable (open) licence.


Graham Klyne
For email:

More information about the Libraries mailing list