04:59 <ec> rrrik: hi! who's this?

05:00 <ec> pikajude: I'm still confused about how it's relevant to the new *syntax*, but I *fiiiiinally* got OCaml's trunk all compiled n shit and played around with it

05:00 <ec> and like, Lwt still works the same as promises w.r.t. exceptions, whether you're unwrapping with the new syntax or not?

05:00 <ec> https://www.irccloud.com/pastebin/xZFLFzZm/

05:01 <ec> likes meh it just runs? the attempt to unwrap a promise in rejection-state on the first line causes the rest of the chained promises — i.e. the rest of the body — to not run … and then the toplevel sees the unhandled rejection and re-throws it as a standard exception

05:02 <ec> but that seems … obvious, so I'm pretty sure I just never quite grasped how Haskell handles that differently, or why this is a concern 🤣

08:21 <rrrik> ec, I was akshatj

18:46 <jfhbrook> the "in" looks like a syntactic wart but maybe ocaml has a lot of that kinda thing already

18:46 <jfhbrook> I don't see a try/catch demo in there but I'm also not sure how the failure is used in that demo either

19:38 <pikajude> ec: yay

19:38 <pikajude> i don't use ocaml

20:20 <jfhbrook> I don't ``do'' ocaml