When reading the word `handle`, I was expecting some kind of resumability, however it seems there is not, which is fine with me, but the word `handle` may be a bit misleading. I don't know what other word could be used, though.
If I understood `pipes-handle` correctly, couldn't the same functionality be achieved with the same `Pipes.Prelude` functions by having `runEffect`, or an alternative function, that works for open-ended `Pipes`? If I remember correctly, this was possible in previous version of `pipes`, what was wrong with that approach? Is `pipes-handle` a entirely different thing? I also spotted some references to non-existent `Pipes.Prelude` like `repeatM` and `mapM_`. Are they going to be added in the next release of `pipes`? On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Gabriel Gonzalez <[email protected]> wrote: > So I previously mentioned how there is a "warm and fuzzy" implementation of > handles in `pipes` in this post: > > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/haskell-pipes/BOwa-14nJn8/WbUApsEOGwEJ > > I finally wrote that up into a library named `pipes-handle`. You can find > that library here: > > https://github.com/Gabriel439/Haskell-Pipes-Handle-Library > > This is a request for comments, especially about the documentation. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Haskell Pipes" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Haskell Pipes" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
