FFI, safe vs unsafe

Ross Paterson ross at soi.city.ac.uk
Tue Apr 11 04:40:03 EDT 2006

On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 09:13:00AM +0100, Simon Marlow wrote:
>  - the default should be... concurrent reentrant, presumably, because
>    that is the safest.  (so we need to invert the notation).

I think the name "concurrent" has a similar problem to "safe": it reads
as an instruction to the implementation, rather than a declaration by the
programmer of the properties of a particular function; as Wolfgang put it,
"this function might spend a lot of time in foreign lands".

More information about the Haskell-prime mailing list