On Tue, 2008-12-23 at 05:21 +0100, wman wrote: > I encountered the following code : > > -- B == Data.ByteString ; L == Data.ByteString.Lazy > contents' = B.intercalate B.empty $ L.toChunks contents > > with a previously unencountered function intercalate. A quick google > query later i knew that it's just intersperse & concat nicely bundled > and started wondering why anybody would do this, as simple > > contents' = B.concat $ L.toChunks contents > > would do (probably nearly) the same. The only thing I am able to come > up with is that it somehow helps streamline the memory usage (if it > has some meaning). > > Is there some reason to use intercalate <empty> <list> instead of > concat <list> (probably when dealing with non-lazy bytestrings) ?
I cannot see any advantage. I would be extremely surprised if the more obscure version was faster. Duncan _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
