[Haskell-cafe] better way to do this?

Conor McBride conor at strictlypositive.org
Wed Oct 7 11:06:59 EDT 2009

On 7 Oct 2009, at 15:04, John A. De Goes wrote:

> 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.

Aye, but today's boilerplate is tomorrow's language design.



More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list