Henning Thielemann wrote: > What are the reasons, you do not like lazy IO?
i guess the biggest issue is when it is safe to release resources. i think a safe paradigm would abstract timely allocation and release of resources; at which point you need to "consume" your whole lazy stream of data and arrive at an abstraction similar to streams + foldl' or iteratees. oleg's paper lists more benefits like improved performance and robustness wrt deadlocks, but i haven't really checked it out yet. > But in general I find lazy stream processing a very elegant > way of programming. recently i've been working with a framework closer to the notion of stream processors rather than working on streams themselves, with the main motivation of being able to use the same algorithms in a non realtime setting (soundfile IO) and in a realtime, callback-based framework (e.g. coreaudio or jack). i'm not sure how lazy streams would be used in such an environment without additional buffering, are you doing this in your synthesizer package? > Why else should we use Haskell and not, say OCaml? because there are far more good uses for lazyness than "just" stream processing ... plus, haskell is way cooler than ocaml ;) <sk> _______________________________________________ haskell-art mailing list haskell-art@lurk.org http://lists.lurk.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-art
