<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Cowboy does accept IOLists. They're very rarely going to <b>not</b>
be the fastest data structure to handle the concatenation strings to
be output, in my experience. I do recommend them for any and all
appending and prepending that needs to be done with web servers,
files, etc.<br>
<br>
On Mon May 7 10:48:19 2012, Wes James wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 8:18 AM, Paul
Barry<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:paul.james.barry@gmail.com"><paul.james.barry@gmail.com></a> wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
I take it that doing it that way is "faster" than string
manipulation<br>
(or is there some other reason for this suggestion)?<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
Based on some discussion I've seen on the list in the past, I
believe<br>
binary is faster. In my case, I'm using binaries to construct html<br>
chunks as I'm using cowboy, but I think cowboy can also use io
lists,<br>
like Fred mentioned.<br>
<br>
-wes<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
erlang-questions mailing list<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:erlang-questions@erlang.org">erlang-questions@erlang.org</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions">http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions</a></blockquote>
</body>
</html>