Hi, Am Montag, den 11.10.2010, 21:29 +0200 schrieb Henning Thielemann: > Gregory Crosswhite schrieb: > > In conclusion, while I greatly appreciate you taking the time to explain > > your reasoning, it still looks to me like there is nothing you have > > gained by using arrows except adding extra unnecessary complexity in > > your library. > > As a pragmatic question: Would it be possible to split hxt even further > into hxt (core) and hxt-arrow, and resurrect hxt-filter? This way people > could choose the way they like to process XML. Or is it too tedious to > maintain both hxt-arrow and hxt-filter? Is it possible to implement one > interface in terms of the other one? It seems that the filter interface > is the more general one, such that the arrow interface may be > implemented in terms of filters.
without having something to add about arrows to the discussion, a little side note from your distribution package maintainer: Before you split up stuff even more into little packages, consider keeping one package but offering different modules If it is just about offering alternative APIs (and not really avoiding additional dependencies), this should be sufficient and is less work for us. Thanks, Joachim -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner mail: m...@joachim-breitner.de | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Key: 4743206C JID: nome...@joachim-breitner.de | http://www.joachim-breitner.de/ Debian Developer: nome...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
