Hi everyone,
after reading all the responses I would like to ask someone, anyone, to
kind of summarize the merits of the left-fold-enumerator approach.
From all that I read so far about it all I was able to gather was that
it has significance but I'm still not even sure what for and what not for.
Apparently Oleg has done various CS work, this particular piece just
being one. But he also broaches the topic at very high level, ok, too
high for me, ie. no CS or higher math background.
Would one of the super geeks please summarize it up? (In RWH kind of
style if possible)
Günther
John Lato schrieb:
Hi Don,
Would you please elaborate on what features or capabilities you think
are missing from left-fold that would elevate it out of the special
purpose category? I think that the conception is so completely
different from bytestrings that just saying it's not a bytestring
equivalent doesn't give me any ideas as to what would make it more
useful. Since the technique is being actively developed and
researched, IMO this is a good time to be making changes.
Incidentally, in my package I've made newtypes that read data into
strict bytestrings. It would be relatively simple to use
unsafeInterleaveIO in an enumerator to create lazy bytestrings using
this technique. I don't see why anyone would want to do so, however,
since it would have all the negatives of lazy IO and be less efficient
than simply using lazy bytestrings directly.
Cheers,
John
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 10:54 PM, Don Stewart <d...@galois.com> wrote:
There are a few iteratee/enumerator design questions that remain,
which Oleg and others would like to explore more fully. The results
of that research will likely find there way into this library.
I agree. There's no left-fold 'bytestring' equivalent. So it remains a
special purpose technique.
-- Don
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
