[Haskell-cafe] [Newbie] Why or why not haskell ?
tomasz.zielonka at gmail.com
Sun Dec 11 12:09:00 EST 2005
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 01:07:47PM +0100, Sven Panne wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 11. Dezember 2005 09:58 schrieb Tomasz Zielonka:
> > [...] I would like to see some support in tools for enforcing such a coding
> > policy. It could look like this - a function written using only safe
> > components would be marked as safe. Every unsafe feature like FFI,
> > unsafePerformIO, etc. would "taint" a module/function, marking it
> > unsafe. [...]
> ... in effect making things like putStrLn, getContents etc. "tainted",
> resulting in probably > 95% of the hierachical libraries in the fptools
> repository being "tainted", including lots of stuff from the H98 report. :-)
> Nice idea, but not very practical IMHO.
Those could be marked as trusted with a high level of confidence.
Anyway, I haven't thought too long about this idea so it's bound to have
problems. It would have to be very well thought out to be practical.
For example, imagine that we have a function f implemented using
functions g and h. I could mark f as safe, but if someone changes
definitions of g or h? Should f be reviewed again? Perhaps the system
should use some kind of contracts... Not an easy thing.
But what can we do to keep Haskell safe? Does anybody else see the same
I am searching for a programmer who is good at least in some of
[Haskell, ML, C++, Linux, FreeBSD, math] for work in Warsaw, Poland
More information about the Haskell-Cafe