[Haskell] why don't we have const Ptrs?

[John Meacham]

On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 06:35:55PM -0500, David Roundy wrote:
> then I wouldn't have a guarantee that strcat isn't specialized for
> writeable Ptrs, in which case it might have the result of modifying a
> pointer when I don't want it to.  Admittedly, this isn't a likely scenario,
> but when I have the typechecker check something, I'd like it to give me a
> guarantee, with the usual caveat that certain "unsafe" functions aren't
> called.  Does the RULES pragma fall in that "unsafe" category?

RULES are in the very unsafe category. you can cause the compiler itself
to bottom out using them. 
        John

-- 
John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈