"Simon Marlow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote, > > > I'm assuming that we want to keep these functions in some form in > > > GHC - where to put them is one issue; Foreign.ForeignPtr is a > > > possibility (but not ForeignPtr), or GHC.ForeignPtr. > > > > I'd put them in GHC.ForeignPtr and make no other change in their name. > > One vote for GHC.ForeignPtr then. Any others? > > > Easy for people to transition, easy for people to see non-portable > > code, probably little risk of collision with the ffi-mandated FunPtr > > versions. > > On the subject of non-portability: the hierarchy is scattered with > non-portable libraries, because the decision was taken a while back not > to use the hierarchy to indicate portability, but to use it to guide > programmers towards *functionality*. There are exceptions - eg. for > extensions which are likely to remain compiler-specific. I don't think > Haskell finalizers are necessarily GHC-specific, so putting them under > GHC doesn't seem right in the long term.
As Haskell finalizers need pre-emptive concurrency, maybe they should go somewhere related to concurrency. Or we could have a "Foreign.Concurrent". Cheers, Manuel _______________________________________________ FFI mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ffi