darcs patch: forkChild, waitForChild, parIO, timeout

[Einar Karttunen]

On 01.11 19:33, Peter Simons wrote:
> However, my experience is that the implementation I submitted
> works just fine. I don't think it is obvious that your
> implementation has better performance. One might argue that the
> cost for setting up an asynchronous exception handler is (at
> least) as high as the cost of forkIO, but I don't really know. In
> any case, my guess is that the actual performance difference is
> negligible for all practical purposes.

The difference was quite large in very concurrent situations
when I did benchmarking earlier between my two implementations
- also note that parIO in your case has the exception handler too.

Just would like to get it right so real-world code would not
have to re-implement it.

- Einar Karttunen