Re: Proposal: add ByteString support to unix:System.Posix.IO API

On 3/2/11 8:49 AM, Simon Marlow wrote:

On 28/02/2011 22:57, wren ng thornton wrote:

...

On 2/28/11 12:28 PM, Johan Tibell wrote:

...

On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:

...

I think that the strict bytestring version should just replace the current function in System.Posix.IO, and [...]

So then what would become of the string variants? Backwards compatibility and all... not _everyone_ uses ByteStrings yet.

The unix package is tied to GHC releases, where the usual convention is to DEPRECATE for one major release (~ 12 months), then remove in the next release.

I'm fine with that. I don't particularly care what happens to the string functions, I'd just like to see the bytestring versions incorporated. But that does raise the issue: if we are to (eventually) remove the string versions and put the bytestring versions in situ, then how should the migration proceed? I'd suggest putting the functions in System.Posix.IO.ByteString for the interim; this has the benefit that I could release a compatibility library allowing people to upgrade without changing their GHC, if need be. But then what happens after the interim? We can't just replace the deprecated string versions with the bytestring versions directly, can we? So would we then deprecate System.Posix.IO.ByteString (another major release...) or just keep it around and have System.Posix.IO re-export it? This is part of why I wasn't suggesting to remove the string functions, much as we'd like people to migrate. -- Live well, ~wren