Proposal: ByteString based datagram communication (Ticket #1238 )

[Bryan O'Sullivan]

Robert Marlow wrote:

> The old API is considered only useful for "testing" anyway, since it
> uses hGetContents and consequently can cause open socket leaks. This
> patch is intended to make those functions more useful and closer to what
> a network programmer might expect from a functions named sendTo /
> recvFrom.

That's fair enough, but this kind of rationale belongs in the header of 
the patch that makes that change, so that people won't be scratching 
their heads, wondering what happened.

> How do you think the patch should be broken up and why?

The description of the patch says that it does four different things. 
That's your cue :-)

	<b