[Haskell-cafe] What unsafeInterleaveIO is unsafe
ketil at malde.org
Tue Mar 17 07:59:17 EDT 2009
Duncan Coutts <duncan.coutts at worc.ox.ac.uk> writes:
>> [..] I have a sneaking suspicion [exceptions] actually *is* `unsafe'. Or, at
>> least, incapable of being given a compositional, continuous semantics.
> Basically if we can only catch exceptions in IO then it doesn't matter,
> it's just a little extra non-determinism and IO has plenty of that
Couldn't you just substitute "catch exceptions" with "unsafePerformIO"
here, and make the same argument?
Similarly, can't you emulate unsafePerformIO with concurrency?
Further, couldn't you, from IO, FFI into a function that examines the
source code of some pure function, thus being able to differentiate
funcitions that are normally "indistinguishable"?
I've tried to follow this discussion, but I don't quite understand
what's so bad about unsafeInterleaveIO - or rather, what's so uniquely
bad about it. It seems the same issues can be found in every corner
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
More information about the Haskell-Cafe