Chaddaï Fouché wrote:
2007/9/26, Adrian Hey [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Chaddaï Fouché wrote:
There can't be alternatives, unsafeIO throw by the window most
guarantee that Haskell can give you and you have to provide them
yourself (with a proof of this part of your program), but it's
inherent to the
On 26/09/2007, Jorge Marques Pelizzoni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, all!
This is a newbie question: I sort of understand what unsafePerformIO does
but I don't quite get its consequences. In short: how safe can one be in
face of it? I mean, conceptually, it allows any Haskell function to have
On Wed, Sep 26, 2007 at 11:43:15AM -0300, Jorge Marques Pelizzoni wrote:
Hi, all!
This is a newbie question: I sort of understand what unsafePerformIO does
but I don't quite get its consequences. In short: how safe can one be in
face of it? I mean, conceptually, it allows any Haskell
Sebastian Sylvan wrote:
Rule of thumb: If your name isn't Simon*, you shouldn't use unsafePerformIO.
If this is so, maybe it's time someone (who may or may not be called
Simon) gave us a realistic alternative.
:-)
Regards
--
Adrian Hey
___
Hello Jorge,
Wednesday, September 26, 2007, 6:43:15 PM, you wrote:
This is a newbie question: I sort of understand what unsafePerformIO does
but I don't quite get its consequences. In short: how safe can one be in
face of it?
i redirect you to http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/IO_inside
and
2007/9/26, Adrian Hey [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Sebastian Sylvan wrote:
Rule of thumb: If your name isn't Simon*, you shouldn't use unsafePerformIO.
If this is so, maybe it's time someone (who may or may not be called
Simon) gave us a realistic alternative.
There can't be alternatives, unsafeIO
Thanks! That's very clarifying.
Bulat Ziganshin escreveu:
Hello Jorge,
Wednesday, September 26, 2007, 6:43:15 PM, you wrote:
This is a newbie question: I sort of understand what unsafePerformIO
does
but I don't quite get its consequences. In short: how safe can one be in
face of it?
i
Things can go arbitrarily wrong if you misuse unsafePerformIO, you can even
subvert the type system.
On 9/26/07, Jorge Marques Pelizzoni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, all!
This is a newbie question: I sort of understand what unsafePerformIO does
but I don't quite get its consequences. In
Jorge Marques Pelizzoni wrote:
Hi, all!
This is a newbie question: I sort of understand what unsafePerformIO does
but I don't quite get its consequences. In short: how safe can one be in
face of it? I mean, conceptually, it allows any Haskell function to have
side effects just as in any
Chaddaï Fouché wrote:
There can't be alternatives, unsafeIO throw by the window most
guarantee that Haskell can give you and you have to provide them
yourself (with a proof of this part of your program), but it's
inherent to the nature of the beast, it's what it do !
What about ..
On 9/26/07, Lennart Augustsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Things can go arbitrarily wrong if you misuse unsafePerformIO, you can even
subvert the type system.
So...if I was in a subversive kind of mood (speaking hypothetically),
what would I have to do?
--
Dan
On 9/26/07, Jorge Marques
On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 14:28 -0700, Dan Piponi wrote:
On 9/26/07, Lennart Augustsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Things can go arbitrarily wrong if you misuse unsafePerformIO, you can even
subvert the type system.
So...if I was in a subversive kind of mood (speaking hypothetically),
what
You could do this:
r :: IORef [a]
r = unsafePerformIO $ newIORef []
cast :: a - b
cast a = unsafePerformIO $ do
writeIORef r [a]
x - readIORef r
return $ head x
On 9/26/07, Dan Piponi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/26/07, Lennart Augustsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Things can go
2007/9/26, Adrian Hey [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Chaddaï Fouché wrote:
There can't be alternatives, unsafeIO throw by the window most
guarantee that Haskell can give you and you have to provide them
yourself (with a proof of this part of your program), but it's
inherent to the nature of the
14 matches
Mail list logo
