Should exhaustiveness testing be on by default?

Simon Peyton-Jones simonpj at microsoft.com
Wed May 20 03:36:30 EDT 2009


Yes indeed
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/users_guide/assertions.html

Simon

| -----Original Message-----
| From: glasgow-haskell-users-bounces at haskell.org [mailto:glasgow-haskell-users-
| bounces at haskell.org] On Behalf Of Peter Hercek
| Sent: 18 May 2009 10:46
| To: glasgow-haskell-users at haskell.org
| Subject: Re: Should exhaustiveness testing be on by default?
|
| Neil Mitchell wrote:
| > I'm not a particular fan of exhaustiveness checking. It just
| > encourages people to write:
| >
| > foo (Just 1) [x:xs] = important case
| > foo _ _ = error "doh!"
| >
| > So now when the program crashes, instead of getting a precise and
| > guaranteed correct error message, I get "doh!" - not particularly
| > helpful for debugging
| Is there some compile option to automatically annotate error call with
| its source
|  code location (so that one dos not need to mention it in the string
| argument)?
|
| Peter.
|
| _______________________________________________
| Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
| Glasgow-haskell-users at haskell.org
| http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users



More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list