Re: Files and Modules

If I understand your comment properly, using ropes wouldn’t help much because the duplication is duplication in individual Texts (ie think of it as manually inlining a function definition because importing is too much hassle), not any issue with duplicated fragments of Texts taking up too much space in memory when loaded. (They sit “at rest” in S3 at the moment, but really they can be thought of as just IO Text values)

On 3 Dec 2024, at 2:10 AM, Brandon Allbery <[email protected]> wrote:

On Mon, Dec 2, 2024 at 9:22 AM julian getcontented.com.au<http://getcontented.com.au/> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
But to go back to what you were saying, if we had the ability to decouple modules from files it would mean I could set up a notion of dependency between the modules that I have stored in Texts in such a way that I wouldn’t need to repeat code between the Texts when I want to share code as I’m compiling chunks of it. At the moment I try hard to keep the set of common items shared between all the code I have because it makes it simpler to manage and keeps duplication low, and it also means the call to stack that I have only has to include a small set of packages and can be common between all the combined sets of code I have.

I wonder if an alternative would be a rope type with shareable strands.

--
brandon s allbery kf8nh
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.