11 Aug
2003
11 Aug
'03
6:11 a.m.
I submit that unsafeInterleaveIO hasn't worked on Hugs since at least July 2000 (when the implementation of concurrency was changed), and that it doesn't seem feasible to implement it with the current concurrency model. So I propose that we drop it from Hugs.
Can't you implement it like this: unsafeInterleaveIO io = return (unsafePerformIO io) I seem to recall some reason why we couldn't do this on GHC, it might have been something to do with the fact that this allows the argument to unsafeInterleaveIO to be performed *before* the unsafeInterleaveIO if the strictness analyser got hold of it, but this won't be a problem for Hugs. Cheers, Simon