[Haskell-cafe] better way to do this?

[John A. De Goes]

On Oct 7, 2009, at 3:13 AM, Ketil Malde wrote:

> Peter Verswyvelen <bugfact at gmail.com> writes:
>
>> So yes, without using IO, Haskell forces you into this safe spot
>
> One could argue that IO should be broken down into a set of "sub- 
> monads"
> encapsulating various subsets of the functionality - file system,
> network access, randomness, and so on.  This could extend the "safe
> spot" to cover much more computational real estate, and effectively
> sandbox programs in various ways.

Good idea in theory, in practice I suspect it would lead to  
unmanageable boilerplate.

Regards,

John A. De Goes
N-Brain, Inc.
The Evolution of Collaboration

http://www.n-brain.net    |    877-376-2724 x 101