On 16/04/2012, Krzysztof Kardzis <[email protected]> wrote: > In regard to the 'easy of use', I think it is just the opposite (of > course we talk about the module 'Network.Curlhs.Core', not 'Base' - > this is another story). But my opinion is not important here, and for > that reason I don't want to compare these two packages by myself. If > you are satisfied with the curl package, just stay with it, I've no > arguments to convince you or anyone. Neverthless, thanks for your > opinion.
Fair. I meant not to bash your work; I just wondered what property of old curl binds you found suboptimal. > Ok, why another bindings? There is no one big reason, only a few small > ones. Overall, I think that these bindings could be done better, and I > think that it will be easier to do that from scratch. If it succeeds, > fine, if not... there is no such an option ;) Here is the first > attempt. > > As I wrote earlier, I would like to create a mid-level interface to > libcurl. The API should be fairly easy to use, fairly complete and > close to the original. I would like to avoid too much interpretation > of the libcurl's API (this could be done at the higher level). Thanks > to that it will be possible among others to take advantage of the > existing documentation, tutorials, examples etc. Ah. If I read that right, you mean that old curl binds are not true enough to the original curl interface. Cheers, strake _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
