On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:25:44AM +0200, Jerzy Karczmarczuk wrote: > Le 20/08/2013 00:19, jabolo...@google.com a écrit : > >If I understand correctly, by "escaping continuations" you mean that > >you can easily transfer control between the point where the exception > >is raised and the exception handler. > > > >If this is what you mean, you can achieve the same effect with monadic > >code by chaining monads together > > José, this is mainly the question of efficiency. You don't need to > establish contact between the distant stack frames, and you may > propagate failures if this happens seldom. But if the escaping > continuation is a frequent case, it might be more economic to > "jump". This is as simple as that.
That's all very well, in which case I wish implementors of such code would wrap their possibly-exception-throwing values in a newtype ThisMightThrowAnException a = ThisMightThrowAnException a monad. Then at least we'd all know. Tom _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe