ForeignPtr-related signatures

Malcolm Wallace Malcolm.Wallace at
Mon Nov 18 05:22:08 EST 2002

Sven Panne <Sven.Panne at> writes:

> Just some small questions: Are we really going to change the signatures
> of newForeignPtr and addForeignPtrFinalizer from those which GHC has for
> ages to the new "C finaliser only" ones? Why don't we use other names
> and deprecate the old ones?

As I recall, there was considerable sympathy for using new names for
the C-finaliser-only functions, preferably incorporating the word "unsafe",
and no-one argued for re-using the old names with the new signatures.


More information about the FFI mailing list