From: Bardur A. <lis...@sc...> - 2005-02-10 10:44:21
|
On Thu, Feb 10, 2005 at 10:30:14AM +0000, Richard Jones wrote: > On Thu, Feb 10, 2005 at 11:22:48AM +0100, Nicolas Cannasse wrote: > > If you mean that we should add string -> char list and char list -> string > > functions to ExtString well I'm not sure it's good. Representing String as > > char arrays/list is probably the worst (look at C). The best way is to treat > > theses caracters uniformaly. > It's not all about performance at all costs though. Agreed. Simply adding a note along the lines of Normally, using this function is a sign that you are doing something extremely inefficient, and you might want to consider another approach. to the ocamldoc should suffice to alert users of possible inefficiency. Frankly, I don't think it's ExtLib's job to prevent users from doing inefficient things, it should simply provide a more comprehensive standard library. (ExtLib *itself* should obviously be as efficient as possible). > For me, most of the time I want to get something done, and speed simply > doesn't matter > - all the programs I'm writing at the moment spend 99.99% of their > time waiting for a remote SOAP server to respond. > > And BTW, it's possible to do the following : > > List.of_enum (String.enum s) > > String.of_enum (List.enum l) Even so, I vote for adding functions for the direct conversions. I mean if it's a FAQ entry it's probably something which is/would be used a lot, right? -- Bardur Arantsson <ba...@im...> <ba...@sc...> - Huh, how'd you get in here? - Well, the door wasn't locked in any *serious* way... Homer Simpson and Security Salesman | The Simpsons |