It's been remarked to me that relying on the Binary and Serialize classes is dangerous, because there's no guarantee they won't maintain a consistent format. So if my app uses the Serialize instances that come with cereal, it could suddenly fail to read old saves after an upgrade to cereal. However, neither binary nor cereal expose the underlying serialization algorithms for various types except through the instances, so I would have to copy and paste the code over if I want control over it. If I don't trust 'instance Serialize String' to not change behind my back, maybe I could at least trust 'Data.Serialize.stringToUtf8' to not change since if it did the name would now be wrong. Are these fears justified? I imagine if the Int instance for Serialize changed there would be an uproar and it would probably have to be changed back. I sent a bug to the maintainers of data-binary a long time ago about the Double instance not serializing -0, and they ignored it, probably because it would be bad to change the instance. So can I use the included instances without fear of them changing between releases? Of course I still run the risk of an instance from some other package changing, but I'm less likely to be using those. Speaking of that Double instance... both data-binary and cereal use decodeFloat and encodeFloat which mean they suffer from the same problems as realToFrac, namely that -0 becomes 0 and NaN becomes -Infinity (I'm not sure why the latter happens since the decoded values differ... must be a problem with encodeFloat). It's tempting to just get the ieee754 bitmap out and serialize that. I know I've seen this question around before, but is it possible to somehow cast a D# directly to bytes? I know I can write a C function and FFI that in, but it would be tidier to do it all in haskell. I guess I can probably use castPtr and memCpy, but I don't see the required addressOf. I.e. how would I write 'memcpy(buf, &d, sizeof(double));'?