seth:
I agree with Don about the current name. If FastPackString is confusing because it isn't a string, doesn't ByteString suffers from the same problem?
I'm not sure if you're agreeing with me Seth :) I do think FastPackedString is not a suitable for a standard Haskell library as long as it only works on byte strings. So, to make crystal clear what the story is, I propose ByteString, following IntMap, to state this. I think its important to keep 'String' in the name, since its a string-mangling library.
Seth
On Thu, 20 Apr 2006 13:26:27 +1000 dons@cse.unsw.edu.au (Donald Bruce Stewart) wrote:
On the topic of a good name for FPS, I think its fairly widely considered that a packed byte "string" shouldn't be considered a String, and thus FastPackedString is a potentially confusing misnomer. It was always meant as a working title until something replaced Data.PackedString anyway.
If this library is to be imported into the base libraries, along with future PackedString.Unicode and so on, layers on top, we should probably get the name right now.
I'm disinclined to call it a ByteArray module -- it doesn't really offer array-like operations. And its got nothing much to do with the other Array.* stuff.
Instead, how about: Data.ByteString (with a connotation of IntMap) ?
That seems to suggest both the stringy-ness of the api, but also the restriction to bytes.
-- Don _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
_______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries