Potential Network SIG
johan.tibell at gmail.com
Mon Aug 24 05:23:45 EDT 2009
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Yitzchak Gale<gale at sefer.org> wrote:
> Johan Tibell wrote:
>> We shouldn't be afraid to use composition to
>> prevent a combinatorial explosion i.e. don't have a sendAsUtf8,
>> sendAsUtf16 but instead do
>> send $ Text.encode Utf8 "myString"
> OK, makes sense. But then, that should appear very
> explicitly in the documentation. It will be the most common
> usage, and people using it will not be focused on Network,
> Bytestring, and Text, but on other things. They should not
> be forced to thrash around and do a research project just
> to do something simple.
I agree. The network package could use a lot more documentation in
general. For example, I put a echo client/server pair example in my
network-bytestring package as the network library lacked even
something that basic.
> Thomas DuBuisson wrote:
>>> 6) Integrate with the rest of hackage.
>>> This means instance of PrettyClass, Parsec, and Binary.
>> I must disagree here. We don't want hard coupling to lots of other
> It won't be a problem if the convenience glue is in separate
> packages that pull in all of the dependencies. But then, these
> other packages need to be mentioned in the documentation
> for the main package.
That is an option. Perhaps something we could look into once we dealt
with the basic design of the network library itself?
More information about the Libraries