On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 10:07 PM, Donn Cave <d...@avvanta.com> wrote:
> Am I confused about this? It's why I can't see Text ever being > simply the obvious choice. [Char] will continue to be the obvious > choice if you want a functional data type that supports pattern > matching etc. Actually, with view patterns, Text is pretty nice to pattern match against: foo (uncons -> Just (c,cs)) = "whee" despam (prefixed "spam" -> Just suffix) = "whee" `mappend` suffix ByteString will continue to be the obvious choice > for big data loads. Don't confuse "I have big data" with "I need bytes". If you are working with bytes, use bytestring. If you are working with text, outside of a few narrow domains you should use text. We'll have a three way choice between programming > elegance, correctness and efficiency. If Haskell were more than > just a research language, this might be its most prominent open > sore, don't you think? No, that's just FUD.
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
