Marc Weber wrote: > On Mon, Feb 02, 2009 at 10:41:57PM -0500, wren ng thornton wrote: >> Marc Weber wrote: >>> Should there be two versions? >>> hslogger-bytestring and hslogger-string? >> I'd just stick with one (with a module for hiding the conversions, as >> desired). Duplicating the code introduces too much room for maintenance and >> compatibility issues. >> >> That's the big thing. The more people that use ByteStrings the less need >> there is to convert when combining libraries. That said, ByteStrings aren't >> a panacea; lists and laziness are very useful. > > Hi wren, > > In the second paragraph you agree that there will be less onversion when > using only one type of strings.
Incidentally, I already wrote a library that abstracts the difference between a String and a ByteString: ListLike. I don't think anybody, including me, even uses it now. Turns out that's not all that helpful an abstraction to make ;-) -- John _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
