Final bikeshedding call: Fixing Control.Exception.bracket

[Mark Lentczner]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm...... That was a slog!  :-)

My take:

   - I buy the "sensible defaults" argument most: bracket should "do the
   generally right thing"
   - Sure... fix hClose *(I can't tell from the discussion if there is or
   isn't really a bug there...but please, don't tell me here - that isn't the
   discussion at hand)* - but I don't see how even in the presence of fixed
   library functions, bracket still shouldn't "do the right thing".
   - As always, I side with Gregory on the deep caution stance - I like
   things to be stable for the long haul....
   - ...but in this case, I didn't see anyone point to *any *preexisting
   code that would break under this proposal. Perhaps we havent done enough
   auditing.... but no one in this long thread pointed at even one such case.
   (Gregory - yours feels a bit contrived, even if you've seen it is some
   other, non-Haskell, proprietary system :-) ) Whereas John Lato has given us
   a simple, reasonable, but utterly broken example under the current bracket.

So here's how I vote:

+1 for Merijn's Proposal - but I'm all for as much aduiting and testing
before we go as we can stand

-0.5 for interruptibleBracket - because it feels like "we weren't sure if
anyone needed this, so we kept it for completeness..." and then it just
becomes something to maintain.

​
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20141117/f7ec13c8/attachment.html>