[Haskell-cafe] Well typed OS

[Ivan Perez]

I sort of see why you might now, but I'm not sure it's what you mean? Could
you elaborate?

I think you can if you base this in some sort of indexed monad and have a
way to join indices. Your process then become a -> (ioM e) a, where e is
the neutral element or index for the index join operation. Perhaps indices
could denote sets of permissions or capabilities.

Ivan


On Fri, 5 Oct 2018 at 22:09, Vanessa McHale <vanessa.mchale at iohk.io> wrote:

> Another thing that would be different in the OS case would likely be
> that one could not have programs/processes of type
>
> a -> a
>
> ...which would make any types stored in an ABI a good deal less flexible
> than those in Haskell.
>
>
> On 10/05/2018 02:46 PM, MarLinn wrote:
> >
> >> You'd probably want an ABI for types, no? You'd need a new executable
> >> format (among many other things!).
> >>
> >> The question is: would it be worth it? Types are wonderful in Haskell
> >> because they allow us to structure our programs. What would structuring
> >> processes via types accomplish? It would improve the situation with
> >> shell scripting/pipes as you allude, but that's still an immense amount
> >> of effort.
> >
> > Now that I think about it… having something like an ABI or a "Haskell
> > binary format" with types in it might indeed be useful in more cases
> > than this one.
> >
> > It seems when a Haskell projects gets a bit larger people tend to
> > search for ways to make it more modular. They try plugin frameworks,
> > OS-level dynamic linking, on-the-fly compilation etc. But I repeatedly
> > get the feeling that all these current approaches aren't actually very
> > good. But what if we had some kind of specialized format for compiled,
> > dynamically loadable, typed Haskell libraries? Something between a
> > plain OS library and bytecode. This might help make programs more
> > modular while keeping them type safe.
> >
> > One thing that might be useful to add next would be some kind of
> > centralized registry of types, so that a plugin/library could extend
> > the ways the system could be extended.
> >
> > And going along this line of thought even further leads to… uhm…
> > oh.    OH.
> >
> > Ok, so, it's the month of Halloween, right?
> >
> > Because… OSGi, but in Haskell.
> >
> > Well, maybe there's some sane point in between?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > MarLinn
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> > To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
> > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
> > Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
> Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20181005/920999d2/attachment.html>