|
Re: Some random newbie questions: msg#00064lang.haskell.cafe
On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 09:11:13AM -0800, Benjamin Pierce wrote: > * As far as I can determine, there is no way to check pattern matches for > exhaustiveness. Coming from OCaml, this feels like losing a significant > safety net! How do people program so as not to be getting dynamic match > failures all the time? ghc does give warnings when pattern matches aren't exhaustive, at least when called with the compile flags used with darcs. It seems that you may be interested in the -fwarn-incomplete-patterns compile flag with ghc. -- David Roundy http://civet.berkeley.edu/droundy/ |
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| Previous by Date: | Some random newbie questions: 00064, Benjamin Pierce |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Some random newbie questions: 00064, Henning Thielemann |
| Previous by Thread: | Some random newbie questionsi: 00064, Benjamin Pierce |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Some random newbie questions: 00064, Henning Thielemann |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
| News | FAQ | advertise |