unsafePerformIO around FFI calls

Hal Daume III [email protected]
Mon, 8 Jul 2002 09:49:54 -0700 (PDT)

I'm curious exactly what is "safe" and what is "unsafe" to wrap
unsafePerformIO around when it comes to FFI calls.  If there's a general
discussion of this somewhere and someone could send me a pointer that
would be another acceptable solution.  I googled for "unsafePerformIO
FFI" but nothing relevant turned up.

Anyway, here's the issue at hand.

I have a function which takes a value and an IO action, allocates some
memory, put the value in there, executes the IO action (which is an FFI
function), gets the result, deallocates the memory and then returns the

For instance, we have an FFI function from LAPack which computes, say,
eigenvalues.  Because this is from fortran and in fortran everything is by
reference, the function is an IO action of (simplified) type:

> maxEigenvalue :: HMatrix -> IO Double

implemented using FFI.

We also have the CPS function to make the HMatrix:

> withMatrix :: [[Double]] -> (HMatrix -> IO Double) -> IO Double

which looks basically like (I'm on vacation so I don't have the real code
right now):

> withHMatrix m action =
>     do memory <- allocate memory
>        hm <- write m into memory
>        result <- action hm
>        deallocate memory
>        return result

(it's slightly more complex because i need to make it safe in the case
that action throws an exception and the memory is still deallocated before
the exception is re-raised.)

i can then wrap these together and say:

> compEig :: [[Double]] -> IO Double
> compEig m = withHMatrix m maxEigenvalue

so the question is:

 Under what circumstances is it safe to make instead:

> compEig' :: [[Double]] -> Double
> compEig' m = unsafePerformIO $ withHMatrix m maxEigenvalue



  - Hal

p.s., Please continue to CC Carl as this issue came up in conversations
with him

Hal Daume III

 "Computer science is no more about computers    | [email protected]
  than astronomy is about telescopes." -Dijkstra | www.isi.edu/~hdaume