> On 14 Nov 2017, at 15:33, Steffen Märcker <merk...@web.de> wrote: > > Hi! > >>> Yes, I agree, Xtreams is much better (but steep learning curve). >>> >>> I just wanted to point out that my contributions in Zn streams focus and >>> better/simpler byte/character IO. >> >> Yes, and it is really nice. >> Interesting how many users we have in system for general streams? (created >> on arbitrary collections). > > I really think streams (in general) should focus on what they are best at. > Namely, (stepwise) reading and writing from and to various sources, and > buffering for efficiency, too. XStreams does an excellent job here. However, > higher level operations - like collecting, selecting, splitting (map, filter, > partition) and such - should be addressed by other means. Those operations > apply to streams, collections, generators and other data structures. They can > efficiently be implemented independent from the data structure. By doing so, > code duplication can be avoided and the API of streams, etc. can be kept > simple. > > Although I won't have time to contribute code, before finishing my thesis, > I'd like to point out, that transducers are here to address exactly this. The > package already works with collections, streams and xstreams.
Are transducers the subject of your thesis ? Any pointers to more information ? > Best, > Steffen >
