> That's what I expected. Would it be possible to include the > new functions > in 5.04.2? OK, that's an API change, too, but simple > additions are rather > harmless. If we don't include this stuff now, there is no > useful common ForeignObj API for GHC/Hugs/NHC in the near future.
Ok, I suppose we could bend the rules a little in this case, as long as we don't change the behaviour of any existing functions. > > [...] Also still unresolved is what to do about > atomicModifyIORef and > > friends, BTW. > > I remember atomicModifyIORef, but what are its "friends" > exactly? PVars > have died, IIRC, and some cunning constraints on the > execution order of > finalizers were rejected, too. There was this, from Dean Herrington: http://haskell.cs.yale.edu/pipermail/ffi/2002-October/000940.html I don't have any strong feelings (I rarely do, where names are concerned). Cheers, Simon _______________________________________________ FFI mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ffi
