On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 9:15 AM, Don Stewart <[email protected]> wrote: > tittoassini: >> 2009/9/28 Don Stewart <[email protected]>: >> > titto: >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> I am looking for an unicode strings library, I found on hackage: >> >> >> >> http://hackage.haskell.org/package/compact-string >> >> >> >> http://hackage.haskell.org/package/text >> >> >> >> They both look solid and functionally complete so ... I don't know which >> >> one to use :-) >> >> >> >> As I am sure I am not the first one facing this choice, may I ask >> >> which one you preferred and why? >> >> > Data.Text >> >> Thanks , but .. why? > > Sorry, was on the way out the door. Data.Text has growing use, is well > designed, and builds on the pedigree of bytestring and the vector* > series of fusion libraries. I trust that code. > > -- Don > _______________________________________________ > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe >
I just have a question out of curiosity - why was the decision made to have Data.Text, uvector, and ByteString all separate data structures, rather than defining the string types in terms of uvector? Alex _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
