parsec3 vs parsec-3.x

Christian Maeder Christian.Maeder at
Wed Feb 2 17:51:55 CET 2011

Am 02.02.2011 17:31, schrieb Antoine Latter:
> On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Christian Maeder
> <Christian.Maeder at> wrote:
>> Am 02.02.2011 16:27, schrieb Antoine Latter:
>>> What do you mean by 'different implementation'? The parsec-3
>>> compatibility layer simply re-exports the Text.Parsec.* functions and
>>> types in a different module hierarchy. Maybe I missunderstood what you
>>> mean.
>> I mean the two implementations: original parsec-2 code and the
>> compatibility layer of parsec-3
>>> I think I'm just really confused - under what scenario I would prefer
>>> using the 'parsec3' package to the 'parsec' package.
>> In the case, where you want your old parsec-2 code to (continue to) use
>> the original implementation and your new code to use the parsec3
>> implementation (in one project).
> Ah! So you want two implementations of a 'parsec' style parser in a
> single package, then?

Well, yes, where my "single package" is for a large binary and the
source pool allows to create separate special-purpose binaries.


> I've never found myself wanting to do that, but I can see how you
> would end up with a smaller testing/upgrade overhead.
> Antoine

More information about the Libraries mailing list