[Haskell-cafe] Safe Haskell?
lemming at henning-thielemann.de
Mon Apr 26 18:23:53 UTC 2021
On Mon, 26 Apr 2021, Tom Ellis wrote:
> I'm curious whether there's anyone in this thread who takes a different
> point of view, in absolute terms.
> The point of contention for me (and I would guess for others too) is
> whether meagre resources at our disposal should be put towards
> SafeHaskell and other Haskell-based language checkers, or we should just
> use what the (comparatively) large and experienced Linux, *BSD, etc..
> developers are already providing and many users are already using for
> hardening efforts.
When SafeHaskell came out I found it a good way to mark modules as Safe in
order to be warned by GHC if they are actually unsafe. Unfortunately I did
not mark many modules this way.
If GHC features are too complex to give such safeness warranties then I
think this is a problem on its own. How would we evaluate code of other
authors? Today, I would add Safe to all modules of a critical package and
watch where that fails and why. This use case cannot be managed by any
sandboxing, container or virtualization technique.
More information about the Haskell-Cafe