Proposal: ByteString based datagram communication (Ticket #1238 )

Bulat Ziganshin bulat.ziganshin at
Thu Apr 5 07:08:22 EDT 2007

Hello Robert,

Thursday, April 5, 2007, 1:14:25 PM, you wrote:

> 1. bos: It breaks the existing stable API
>    I need more information on this; I can't see what's broken unless the
>    change of sendTo and recvFrom to datagram functions is what is
>    considered broken. I'd argue the current sendTo and recvFrom 
>    functions are what is broken in terms of usefulness and how their 
>    functionality fits their names. This patch fixes that.

but why you provide ByteString-only API?? i think that more common
idiom is to provide String functions here and use somewhat like
Network.ByteString, Network.ByteString.Lazy modules to provide
ByteString/ByteStringLazy equivalents of String function from

Best regards,
 Bulat                            mailto:Bulat.Ziganshin at

More information about the Libraries mailing list