> Am 18.10.2019 um 11:33 schrieb Kasper Østerbye <kasper.oster...@gmail.com>: > > On 18 October 2019 at 08.00.13, Richard O'Keefe (rao...@gmail.com > <mailto:rao...@gmail.com>) wrote: >> When is it pointless to introduce a WriteStream and just use #, ? >> When #, would not be in a loop or recursion. >> Constructing error messages, class initialisation code, that sort of thing. >> >> If you find yourself doing a lot of concatenations, you are probably >> missing an abstraction. For example, building up XML by string >> concatenation would be very silly: you want to build a tree and have >> it write itself to a stream. > > Absolutely agree. Streams use logarithmic extension of buffer, concatenation > linear, but it is still amazing to see. > > I am working on a pillar to `Text` generator. Here I found concatenation to > be simpler to handle as I can add bold, italics, indentation, etc. in a much > simpler way. To use a streaming method I would have to introduce both Canvas > and Aggregate brushes. Doable indeed, but much less concise. > > I started to do exactly the same. Well I started to do a converter between pillar markup and text attributes, but I think you do the same. We probably should talk. Is you code anywhere public?
Norbert > Best, > > Kasper >
