Duncan Coutts wrote:
So perhaps that's my straw-man proposal: * change BS.findSubstring to be :: BS -> BS -> (BS, BS) in the style of List.break * remove the current BS.findSubstrings
While List.break is useful, it has the equally useful counterpart
(dropWhile . not . (==)) that doesn't accumulate the prefix of a match.
For a long sequence, this has appeal. Let's say you're reading ten
gigabytes of data over the network, so you have no control over the
incoming chunk size (as we don't provide a rechunking mechanism at
present, so this isn't a hypothetical issue). A findSubstring that
accumulates the prefix could easily cons an fatally large number of chunks.
I'm not saying that the signature you suggest shouldn't be present,
merely that it's not enough: it wants a counterpart that accumulates
either nothing or something safe like an Int64 that counts the length of
the prefix.