DDC compiler and effects; better than Haskell? (was Re: [Haskell-cafe] unsafeDestructiveAssign?)

[Jason Dusek]

2009/08/14 John A. De Goes <john at n-brain.net>:
> Hmmm, my point (perhaps I wasn't clear), is that different
> effects have different commutability properties. In the case
> of a file system, you can commute two sequential reads from
> two different files.

  I think this is a bad example -- it's not something that's
  safe in general and discredits your idea. How would the
  compiler even know that two files are not actually the same
  file?

  However, the idea that a programmer can specify safely
  commuting effects is worthwhile. One could operate in a
  "different files are different" IO monad where the compiler
  assumes that reads on files with different names are
  commutable.

> This has no effect on the result of the computation, assuming
> no interference from other programs -- and if there _is_
> interference from other programs, then guarantees go out the
> window, _with or without_ commuting.

  Well, yes -- which sounds like, there are no guarantees
  in general. Something that works half the time leaves you with
  two responsibilities -- the old responsibility of the work you
  did when you didn't have it and the new responsibility of
  knowing when it applies and when it doesn't.

--
Jason Dusek