Should exhaustiveness testing be on by default?

[Peter Hercek]

Simon Marlow wrote:
> On 28/05/2009 15:09, Claus Reinke wrote:
>> so for mere
>> traces, dynamic seems to be the choice (with an option of pseudo-cbv
>> or the real dynamic stack).
>
> I don't know what pseudo-cbv is.  And I claim the dynamic stack is 
> almost never what you want.
>
> Ok, so there's one place you might want to see the dynamic stack: when 
> catching exceptions raised by pure code.

Would it not help also when finding out why some code is not as lazy as 
it is hoped for? Now, I do not know how often this problem happens, I 
did not have it yet, but it looks like it would help. I remember I also 
wanted it when I was trying to understand how uulib works. I would 
expect it to be useful anytime laziness is critical for efficient 
program execution.

If the stacks do not come with variables in the scope available then 
both are useful about the same from my rather unexperienced point of view.

Anyway, after I'd learned to use GhciExt (thank you both for helping me 
out with it), the next command became more important to me than the 
stack. That is for my code, if/when I get to uulib again I may change my 
mind quickly :-D

Peter.