sven.panne at aedion.de
Thu Mar 15 13:10:18 EDT 2007
On Thursday 15 March 2007 17:25, Neil Mitchell wrote:
> So can I propose we add filepath, with this agreement that once
> (someone else) gets around to doing option b, we can split it out
> The particular argument for upgrading the filepath library I think is
> not important - I never intend to do more filepath hacking. Someone
> might add one or two functions, but thats about the most I can
> invision. It's not a particularly pleasant job, its ugly - the only
> reason I started this was because the alternative is having everything
> broken on Windows - something I do care about.
I would prefer b), too, mainly because I think that splitting up base in a
sensible way most people can agree on is a Herculean task.
Although this has almost been discussed to death, I still have one issue: File
paths on *nix are *not* strings, they are simply a bunch of bytes, hopefully
Haskell' will get this right. Adding a String-based module to base would give
a conceptually wrong thing an "official touch". :-( Don't get me wrong: The
operations in FilePath are OK, just the concrete representation is not
What is the general strategy for Haskell' regarding this topic: Is I/O out of
the scope of Haskell' itself? If not, what are the plans/the strategy for
transitioning to something more correct? To be honest: I don't see an easy
way out without breaking lots of existing programs.
More information about the Libraries