On 24/04/2012 14:14, Daniel Peebles wrote:
Why are potentially partial literals scarier than the fact that every
value in the language could lead to an exception when forced?
My thoughts exactly. In this thread people are using the term "safe" to
mean "total". We already overload "safe" too much, might it be a better
idea to use "total" instead?
(and FWIW I'm not sure I see what all the fuss is about either)
Cheers,
Simon
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 5:35 AM, Yitzchak Gale <g...@sefer.org
<mailto:g...@sefer.org>> wrote:
Markus Läll wrote:
You do know, that you already *can* have safe Text and ByteString
from
an overloaded string literal.
Yes, the IsString instances for Text and ByteString are safe (I
hope).
But in order to use them, I have to turn on OverloadedStrings. That
could cause other string literals in the same module to throw
exceptions at run time.
-Yitz
_______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users
mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
<mailto:Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org>
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
_______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users
mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
