Proposal to add recvBuf and sendTo to Network.Socket

Simon Horman horms at
Wed Dec 29 23:09:12 CET 2010

On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 06:39:37PM +0100, Johan Tibell wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 12:49 AM, Simon Horman <horms at> wrote:
> > My proposed solution to this is to implement recvBuf.  For the sake of
> > symmetry I think that it it would also make sense to add sendBuf, although
> > I don't have any performance-based reasons for this.
> I do intend to add recvBuf (perhaps as recvInto). I'm not so sure
> about sendBuf as it can be implemented with almost no performance cost
> by wrapping a ByteString constructor around a buffer.
> > Before preparing patches - I have a crude one for testing that works -
> > I would like to get an idea of if this change acceptable or not. And
> > if so discuss which API calls might be appropriate to add.
> I'd prefer if you just added Network.Socket.recvBuf for now, against
> the current HEAD.

Sure, I will prepare a patch.

More information about the Libraries mailing list