On 2014-01-06, at 11:57 , Stephen J. Turnbull
Geert Jansen writes:
I'm not missing a new type, but I am missing the format method on the binary types.
I'm curious about precisely what your use cases are, and just what formatting they need.
Building up protocol output, especially (but not solely) ascii-based ones, from existing or computed parts. Basically the same reasons behind Erlang's bit syntax (on the building side thereof): http://www.erlang.org/doc/programming_examples/bit_syntax.html Essentially a partial and more readable (especially more readable) version of what `struct` provides, and one in which the "pattern" can contain literal constant content. `struct` is nice, but it doesn't scale very well to big binary creation, and it's fairly horrible when part of the output is constant as constant parts *still* have to be patterned and injected as parameters. Also, no support for keyword arguments.