On 02/05/10 12:10, Sebastian Fischer wrote:
Is the above output intended?
Yes.
Interesting.
Note that catching all exceptions is rarely the right thing to do. See
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/6.12.2/html/libraries/base-4.2.0.1/Control-Exception.html#4
for more details.
I should have w
On Sun, May 02, 2010 at 01:10:17PM +0200, Sebastian Fischer wrote:
> What makes me wary is that GHC distinguishes between different kinds
> of non-terminating computations (those it can detect as black holes
> and those it can't). As a consequence, the semantics of my program
> depends on how I def
Is the above output intended?
Yes.
Interesting.
Note that catching all exceptions is rarely the right thing to do. See
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/6.12.2/html/libraries/base-4.2.0.1/Control-Exception.html#4
for more details.
I should have written
go_ahead :: NonTermination ->
On Sun, May 02, 2010 at 12:10:23AM +0200, Sebastian Fischer wrote:
>
> although, don't_launch_first is a non-terminating computation. Without
> black-hole detection this code would never 'launch missiles'.
>
> Is the above output intended?
Yes.
> go_ahead :: SomeException -> IO ()
> go
Hello,
GHC can spot (some) non-terminating computations and terminate with
blackhole: <>
instead of running indefinitely. With exception handling one can
handle such situations. The following program 'launches missiles':
import Control.Exception
main = do handle go_ahead don't_
