Re: bytevector docs -> compound data types?

[Neil Jerram]

Andy Wingo <address@hidden> writes:

> Another option of course is to not classify data types by "simple" or
> "compound", but some division is necessary.
>
> Perhaps our master wordsmith Baron von Jerram has a perspective :)

Huh?  Where did that `Baron' come from?

But anyway...  I don't have a strong opinion here, but

- I think that bytevectors go with other kinds of vectors more closely
  than they go with strings

- I think we could benefit from discarding the Simple vs Compound
  division - i.e. combine everything into a single `Data Types'
  section.  `Pairs' could be much nearer the top of the combined list
  than it is now.

Regards,
        Neil