thenIO removal

David Feuer david.feuer at
Mon Nov 3 15:16:08 UTC 2014

Simon Peyton Jones wrote:

> It's not a big deal.
> You can probably replace both those bindIOName uses with bindMName (i.e
> (>>=)), in TcRnDriver.  That will just make GHCi generate code with uses of
> overloaded (>>=) that must be evaluated, rather than calling bindIO
> directly.  It should work just fine, but it'll make everything a tiny bit
> slower and more indirect.  If it simplified the code a lot, then fine, but
> it doesn't really.  So I'm inclined to leave it.

That's fine; I don't know why my search didn't turn that up (perhaps it's
referenced in some weird indirect way). If we're going to keep thenIO, we
should surely define (*>) = (>>) = thenIO, right?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the ghc-devs mailing list