On 09/06/2015 23:26, Johan Tibell wrote: > Thanks for putting this together. > > The proposal says: > > "As a consequence, in current Haskell, you can not use Monad-polymorphic > code safely, because although it claims to work for all Monads, it might > just crash on you. This kind of implicit non-totality baked into the > class is terrible." > > Is this actually a problem in practice? Is there any code we can point > to that suffers because of the current state of affairs? Could it be > included in the proposal?
Here's a concrete example: https://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/2015-March/025166.html I needed to change some code that used a monad with an explicit fail to use one without, and I couldn't get the compiler to tell me if it was using partial pattern matches or not. If it had been then the refactoring would have caused a nasty behaviour change. Ganesh _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs