[Haskell-cafe] [Newbie] Why or why not haskell ?

Tomasz Zielonka 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

Best regards

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 mailing list