I was looking for something which works in optimized builds too. I know I could do it with preprocessor or (I think) template haskell too but these tools seem to heavy for such a simple goal. The point is the exhaustiveness check saves me from some errors sometimes, but I often need to switch it off for a specific case statement too. Adding an catch all alternative and an error call would be cool way to do it if there is a way to automatically add source code location. This way I could get the best error telling me where it happend and also why I thought the other alternatives should not happen (the error call argument). Thanks, Peter. Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
Yes indeed http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/users_guide/assertions.html
Simon
| -----Original Message----- | From: glasgow-haskell-users-bounces@haskell.org [mailto:glasgow-haskell-users- | bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of Peter Hercek | Sent: 18 May 2009 10:46 | To: glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org | Subject: Re: Should exhaustiveness testing be on by default? | | Neil Mitchell wrote: | > I'm not a particular fan of exhaustiveness checking. It just | > encourages people to write: | > | > foo (Just 1) [x:xs] = important case | > foo _ _ = error "doh!" | > | > So now when the program crashes, instead of getting a precise and | > guaranteed correct error message, I get "doh!" - not particularly | > helpful for debugging | Is there some compile option to automatically annotate error call with | its source | code location (so that one dos not need to mention it in the string | argument)? | | Peter. | | _______________________________________________ | Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list | Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org | http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users