ByteString I/O Performance

[Peter Simons]

Bryan O'Sullivan writes:

 > I find that people are more responsive when not being flamed, and
 > when they get the sense that their helpful words aren't falling on
 > deaf ears.

Bryan, I appreciate that you are trying to help. I apologize if I have
left the impression that I wouldn't. E-mail is an imperfect medium. It
is hard for human beings to communicate when they cannot see each
other or hear each other's voices.

With a little luck, we'll bump into each other on a conference or
whatever other occasion, and then I'd love to chat and have a beer
with you. You may find that there is a bit of humor in some of the
remarks you may now perceive as offensive because we don't know each
other.


 > It is perfectly true that you can take an existing ByteString and
 > smoosh its innards however you like, because the authors sensibly
 > made this possible. However, doing so breaks referential
 > transparency, so it's not encouraged as a general principle.

Yes, that is true.


 > It's very much in the realm of "here's the gun, there's your foot,
 > be careful".

Personally, I feel guns are really bad news and I would not want to
have any around me in real life. That is because a mishap with a gun
can kill someone. When it comes to developing software, however, the
risks I perceive are slightly less severe, so I feel more adventurous.
That is my personal decision, so naturally I respect that others are
free to choose differently.

Take care,
Peter