"FastPackedString" considered harmful

Seth Kurtzberg seth at cql.com
Wed Apr 19 23:30:52 EDT 2006

I agree with Don about the current name.  If FastPackString is confusing because it isn't a string, doesn't ByteString suffers from the same problem?


On Thu, 20 Apr 2006 13:26:27 +1000
dons at cse.unsw.edu.au (Donald Bruce Stewart) wrote:

> On the topic of a good name for FPS, I think its fairly widely
> considered that a packed byte "string" shouldn't be considered a String,
> and thus FastPackedString is a potentially confusing misnomer.
> It was always meant as a working title until something replaced
> Data.PackedString anyway.
> If this library is to be imported into the base libraries, along with
> future PackedString.Unicode and so on, layers on top, we should probably
> get the name right now.
> I'm disinclined to call it a ByteArray module -- it doesn't really offer
> array-like operations. And its got nothing much to do with the other
> Array.* stuff.
> Instead, how about: Data.ByteString  (with a connotation of IntMap) ?
> That seems to suggest both the stringy-ness of the api, but also the
> restriction to bytes.
> -- Don
> _______________________________________________
> Libraries mailing list
> Libraries at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries

More information about the Libraries mailing list