| > By simulating exceptions, do you mean a `Result t e` type (which Haskell calls `Either l r`)? Yes, exactly. > The semantics of these are.. interesting, mostly thanks to lazy evaluation. For example, `fst (5, error "second") ` is safe to evaluate because the second half of the tuple is a thunk and does not get evaluated Correct, and the semantics of loops is also.. interesting. For example `fst (5, last [1..])` is also safe to evaluate. > What is presumably talked about is that Haskell also has actual exceptions, generated by calling e.g. `error` or `undefined`. Well, I'm not sure, that's why I asked. I'm trying to understand what astrange meant by "it has exceptions which are a bad language feature, and typed throws which are a worse one". (Throwing exceptions from pure code should be left to such cases, that are impossible to recover from, in my opinion.) > there is, to my knowledge, no way to handle exceptions in pure code, presumably due to the undefined evaluation order Correct > That said, I'm not sure what the alternative would be, because a function like !! (list indexing) can fail and dealing with its fallibility would be a big burden on the programmer. Indeed. Even more so, what is one supposed to do when an invariant has been violated due to a programming error and there's no way to make progress? Haskell's exceptions are essential. It's even better when they're used in a well typed, well scoped manner, such as provided by my effect library Bluefin https://hackage.haskell.org/package/bluefin-0.0.6.0/docs/Blu... That's why I wanted to understand more about what astrange meant. It doesn't match my understanding! |
I haven't used Bluefin, but don't Bluefin exceptions suffer from the same issue where it, essentially, 'infects' the program flow? For example, `fst (5, error "second")` seems like it would translate to `fst $ (5,) <$> throw e "second"`, where you would also need to pull an `e` from somewhere. More realistic, something like head would probably be quite awkward:
head e [] = throw e "head: empty list" head e (x:xs) = pure x
You now need to pass in the exception handle, and the return value is now `Eff es a` instead of `a`. This means that you cannot just use the result, so you will likely need to fill your program with monadic stuff like do-notation, <$> and <$>, complicating the program flow and likely also reducing laziness.