Proposal: new signal-handling API

[Bryan O'Sullivan]

On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 10:07 AM, Duncan Coutts
<duncan.coutts at worc.ox.ac.uk> wrote:

> I do understand the desire for that. The downside of course is that a
> lower level api has to be used very carefully to avoid breaking the
> promises provided by the higher level api.

True.

> There is and it's not changed by Simon's proposal:
>
> awaitSignal :: Maybe SignalSet -> IO
> ()

Actually, awaitSignal isn't the same as sigwaitinfo; the latter
returns the siginfo_t for the received signal.