iteratee comparisons vs. enumerator package

[John Lato]

+1 to this.

At some time I heard the claim that the iteratee style makes explicit some
of the transforms that take place in stream fusion.  I wonder if that's
where John got the idea for the Yield constructor, or if it fell out of the
design as a necessity.  I should ask him.

John

On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 1:54 AM, Conrad Parker <conrad at metadecks.org> wrote:

> I haven't tried it because I need bytestring and seeking support which it
> does not provide. However I like some of its design, such as Yield which is
> a neater way of handling unprocessed elements than my convStateStream
> function. It may be the case that the CPS style of iteratee 0.4 is even
> neater.
>
> I hope we can work together towards a common API and infrastructure rather
> than make marginal and incompatible improvements just for benchmarking.
>
> cheers,
>
> Conrad.
>
> On Aug 21, 2010 12:38 AM, "John Lato" <jwlato at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Has anyone tried out John Millikin's recently-announced enumerator package?
>  I've long felt that there's a place for a light-weight iteratee framework
> so I'm glad to see him take it up.  Based on my very limited tests so far
> (essentially testing wc -l), enumerator doesn't seem quite as efficient as
> iteratee-HEAD, but it is the 0.1 release.
>
> John
>
> _______________________________________________
> Iteratee mailing list
> Iteratee at projects.haskell.org
> http://projects.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/iteratee
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://projects.haskell.org/pipermail/iteratee/attachments/20100823/48a52a09/attachment.htm