One thing I'd really like to see, now that I'm thinking about it, is to drop the dependency on the ./configure step when building network. If I can figure this out without changing how Network.Socket works now, would that be something we could merge into the package?
I've love to see a Build-Type of Simple. On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 8:03 AM, Johan Tibell<johan.tib...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 1:52 PM, Thomas DuBuisson > <thomas.dubuis...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Johan - glad you chimed in! >> >> I'm all in favor of keeping a low level interface and don't have an >> issue with Network.Socket existing, I additionally really like the >> suggestion of moving from the ML to a wiki in the same style as >> Haskell'. >> >> I'll port these comments to the wiki if that is whats agreed on and >> hold off on other thoughts for now. > > Yes, please start a new wiki page. We can still discuss issues here and add > things to the wiki as different solutions materialize. > >> >> * Avoiding a 'heavy weight' solution for socket state might get ugly >> fast with all the 'Either a b' results that we'll need - also a socket >> can close at any time so a socket in 'Connected' state might not >> actually be connected. I understand the attraction to a light >> solution using existential types but Tim Sheard sketched for me a >> reasonable alternative which I invite him to restate here, if he has >> the time. > > Good point. The encodings using existential types are not very lightweight > in my opinion. I'd love to hear Tim's alternative. > > -- Johan > > > _______________________________________________ > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe > > -- /jve _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
