Yes, `repeatM` and `mapM_` will be added for consistency.
I use handle in the sense that `io-streams` does. There is an almost
one-to-one mapping between `pipes-handle` and `io-streams` if you ignore
`io-streams`'s pushback feature.
On 02/15/2014 02:07 AM, Danny Navarro wrote:
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].
