Manuel: > In other words, it seem much more likely that one would > partially apply `newForeignPtr' to a finaliser than to a > pointer that is to be finalised. But this is a minor point.
Having written some more ffi code over the last couple of days, I agree that this is much more natural so, even though it will break all the packages I released in the last week, I now vote for swapping the argument order. Since this breaks code anyway, we could adopt Dean's proposal to allow lists of arguments to newFP and addFPFinalizers without making things worse. I don't think we should do this though since I believe they would always be used with singleton or empty arguments and because the list-based versions can be trivially added with a foldM if they prove useful. -- Alastair Reid _______________________________________________ FFI mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ffi
