yeah, if it were to be renamed, those would be good ideas. On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 4:35 AM Vladislav Zavialov wrote:

ByteString may not be the best way to represent a sequence of bytes, as it contributes to heap fragmentation by using pinned memory.

Its primary use case should be FFI, and it's largely misused today.

If we rename it, let's call it "PinnedBytes", and use the name "Bytes" for ShortByteString, ByteArray, or Array Word8

All the best, Vlad

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019, 12:25 Merijn Verstraaten

...

Ok, so I think there is a fairly wide consensus that the name ByteString is a pretty misleading historical naming mistake. On the other hand, I also realise bytestring is at the very core of the Haskell ecosystem and any breakage has to be avoided at all cost...

So I was just wondering on IRC what (if any?) problems we'd run into if we released a "bytes" package that's just s/ByteString/Bytes of bytestring (Data.Bytes, Bytes type, etc) then turn bytestring into a hollow shell that just re-exports Data.Bytes as Data.ByteString, etc. and defines "type ByteString = Bytes".

I realise there's no way we'll get rid of bytestring itself any time soon (if ever), but at least we could point new code and beginners at a less confusingly named type. Added bonus Bytes is considerably shorter to type!

Cheers, Merijn _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

_______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries