On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 17:36:04 -0700, Larry Wall wrote: > Sure, when it slows down your compiler so much that it's useless for > running code that doesn't have the error, especially if it's a rare > error that is likely to be caught some other way anyway. Where to > balance this should be the decision of the user, particularly since > the balance point changes over time and space.
Good point... Is there half-way solution, btw?
Perhaps type inferrencing annotation rich areas is a good idea to
help a user who is trying to debug by adding more of these.
> It's also potentially counterproductive if the information available
> at compile time leads to confusingly abstract error messages when
> run-time information might produced clearer concrete error messages.
> When I use the term "confusing", I do so in the Pooh sense. I'm trying
> to think of what will be confusing to ordinary folks, not to geniuses
> like you.
*blush*.
For the record it takes me roughly 1 irc client or around 10
careful, concentrated rereadings to understand what GHC tells me in
these situations, but for the record.
A useful reference is the Error Messages section on this page:
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/survey2005-summary.html
It mentions both that there are active areas of research on how to
make these better, and that GHC messages both suck and don't suck at
the same time.
--
() Yuval Kogman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 0xEBD27418 perl hacker &
/\ kung foo master: /me dodges cabbages like macalypse log N: neeyah!
pgpb2QyvQWJkC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
