Re: Proposal: Use uninterruptibleMask for cleanup actions in Control.Exception

On 2014-09-04 18:03, Eyal Lotem wrote:

On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 6:16 PM, Eric Mertens wrote:

[--snip--]

...

I'm -1 until it becomes clear that it is actually an issue in common code.

I think you're missing an important point.

A) Cases that were not interruptible will remain the same. B) Cases that were interruptible *were bugs* and will be fixed.

You're claiming that B is rare, but I don't think it is a valid argument against this change, because whether or not you agree B is frequent or not -- the change only affects B and not A. So the question is whether the change is desirable in this circumstance.

I'm in *no* way an expert on the finer points of concurrency in Haskell, but if the above is true, then +1. Regards,