
-1 from me, adding things to base like this is a step backwards IMO. I
don't see a problem with adding a generalize evaluate to primitive as well,
however. We could also consider adding an evaluateST function somewhere in
base, if that was desired (I've personally never needed it, but I could
imagine it being useful).
On Wed Jan 07 2015 at 5:41:06 PM David Feuer
Apparently, there was an issue with my last messages about this for some people, so here's the idea again:
We could generalize Control.Exception.evaluate to
evaluate :: PrimMonad m => a -> m a evaluate a = primitive (\s -> seq# a s)
and then export it from Control.Monad.Primitive as well, which seems to me a much more natural place for it. The only challenge is that the PrimMonad class would need to be moved to base. _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries