Proposal: give Ptr a nominal role

[Carter Schonwald]

... Ptr *is not* tied to storable, Storable is a convenience for FFI
integration .. storable is tied to ptr

there are whole MOUNTAINS of haskell code that underly this, and we can't
lawyer it away with some opinions

On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 2:16 PM David Feuer <david.feuer at gmail.com> wrote:

> Indeed. I think the point is that Ptr should be thought of as tied to
> Storable. If you want to use an Addr# for something else, then you
> shouldn't be using Ptr!
>
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018, 2:13 PM Evan Laforge <qdunkan at gmail.com wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:47 AM Carter Schonwald
>> <carter.schonwald at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > a good example might be Ptr Char.  Is this a single location of a 32bit
>> / utf32 code point, or an array of utf8 code points or utf32 code points?
>> > is it null terminated vs there being an extra sequence length? These
>> are all valid things that can be happening. And
>>
>> I'm not sure if it affects your point, but I sure hope a 'Ptr Char'
>> points to a 4 byte haskell Char as it claims, and 'Ptr CChar' points
>> to a 1 byte C char, as it claims.  Otherwise, sizeOf will be wrong and
>> array indexing will go out of bounds.
>>
>> Of course, in the C case, whether or not there are further chars after
>> that and if they are terminated and what is the encoding is all
>> ambiguous, as it always is for C.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Libraries mailing list
>> Libraries at haskell.org
>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20181101/b2f9573b/attachment.html>