I'd prefer

ec_str and ec_bin_str

Thoughts?

JW

On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 11:47 PM, Martin Logan <[email protected]>wrote:

> ec_BS ;-)
>
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 10:24 PM, Eric Merritt <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > I agree with martin, I think of it as an optimization that gets used
> > where needed, so I tend not to use it much. I just want us to be
> > explicit about what type of string a string module is focused on. Btw
> > ec_binary_string seams pretty long.
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 10:29 PM, Martin Logan <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >> lets have a ec_binary_string module as well. I consider binary strings
> >> an optimization typically and don't normally use them.
> >>
> >> On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 7:52 PM, Jordan Wilberding
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> This is a touch choice. My personal opinion is binary strings, but that
> >>> hasn't been well adopted yet. Any reason we can't support both?
> >>> Thanks!
> >>> JW
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 8:15 PM, Eric Merritt <[email protected]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> As we are gearing up for new development and you are mentioning
> >>>> strings I think its probably a good idea to explicitly settle on the
> >>>> strings we are going to us. Lists or Binaries? I suspect lists and
> >>>> thats what I would vote for but it is something we should come to
> >>>> agreement on.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 8:04 PM, Martin Logan <[email protected]
> >
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>> > All, I pushed code to my master branch that contains two new
> modules.
> >>>> > The first is ec_semver which contains a function for comparing
> semver
> >>>> > strings. The second is ec_string which starts the module for string
> >>>> > handling. I added a function that compares pretty much any resonable
> >>>> > version string out there. These functions are particularly useful
> for
> >>>> > sorting by versions.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Please take a look.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > --
> >>>> > Martin Logan
> >>>> > Erlang & OTP in Action (Manning) http://manning.com/logan
> >>>> > http://twitter.com/martinjlogan
> >>>> > http://erlware.org
> >>>> >
> >>>> > --
> >>>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> >>>> > Groups "erlware-dev" group.
> >>>> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >>>> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> >>>> > [email protected].
> >>>> > For more options, visit this group at
> >>>> > http://groups.google.com/group/erlware-dev?hl=en.
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups
> >>>> "erlware-dev" group.
> >>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> >>>> [email protected].
> >>>> For more options, visit this group at
> >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/erlware-dev?hl=en.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups
> >>> "erlware-dev" group.
> >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> >>> [email protected].
> >>> For more options, visit this group at
> >>> http://groups.google.com/group/erlware-dev?hl=en.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Martin Logan
> >> Erlang & OTP in Action (Manning) http://manning.com/logan
> >> http://twitter.com/martinjlogan
> >> http://erlware.org
> >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Martin Logan
> Erlang & OTP in Action (Manning) http://manning.com/logan
> http://twitter.com/martinjlogan
> http://erlware.org
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"erlware-dev" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/erlware-dev?hl=en.

Reply via email to