Hi Bas,
I'm not sure the unpacking is absolutely necessary. It might be worth
to give it a try with not-unpacked strict chunks. In some of my
ByteString builder experiments, I even got better performance by not
unpacking the ByteStrings in some of the intermediate data structures.
My gut feeling
he recent discussion of whether storablevector should be deprecated in
favor of vector reminded me: vector supports storable arrays, but it
doesn't support lazy arrays. While storablevector has lazy arrays and
a builder, it doesn't support boxed types (it would be become misnamed
if it did!).
So
I remember this discussion, lazy vectors would also enable an
implementation of bytestring and (maybe) text only with unboxed vectors,
unifying it all:
type ByteString = Vector Word8
2012/7/12 Evan Laforge qdun...@gmail.com
he recent discussion of whether storablevector should be deprecated in
On 12 July 2012 15:35, Yves Parès yves.pa...@gmail.com wrote:
I remember this discussion, lazy vectors would also enable an implementation
of bytestring and (maybe) text only with unboxed vectors, unifying it all:
type ByteString = Vector Word8
Yes, I would like to add a lazy storable vector
