Hi >> Data.Binary is the low level frameworks, now people can pick up the rest. >Last time I checked, there's about half a dozen "binary" packages. All >incompatible. All with different design. Seriously not obvious which one >to use...
Data.Binary is the answer, http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~dons/binary.html >> The Unix stuff does all this, and the win32 stuff does it on Windows. > Mmm... looks lovely. Any danger of documentation? msdn.microsoft.com - if you know the C API, you can figure out the Haskell one. No one should ever have to learn the Win32 API though, its horrible. > Still, everybody keeps muttering that "functional is the next big > thing", and Erlang is taking over the world, so many Haskell's day will > come. I quite like the fact that I'm massively more productive than most other programmers - at the end of the day that's what will make me worth more money and happier than everyone else. Haskell might never be popular, that's fine by me - I like elegance much more than cheerleading :-) * Thanks Neil * Of course, all the cheerleading leads to more libraries which makes me more productive and happier, so its all a win in the end. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
