David Leimbach schrieb:
Haskell's great and all but it does have a few warts when it comes to
how much real trust one should put into the type system.
Some compromises still exist like unsafePerformIO that you can't detect
simply by looking at the types of functions.
In order to live up
SPJ http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/people/simonpj/default.aspx and
probably many others are actually employed at Microsoft research centers. It
looks like Microsoft just hasn't been able to find a suitable spot to push
Haskell. Haskell influenced F# because they needed a functional language
I guess that the house
OShttp://www.google.com/search?hl=ensafe=offq=+house+OS+haskellaq=faqi=g-sx7aql=oq=gs_rfai=has
no one of these problems that singularity tries to solve in the first
place.
The problem of general OSs is: we have unsafe code, so what we do to deal
with it?. The usual option
Haskell's great and all but it does have a few warts when it comes to how
much real trust one should put into the type system.
Some compromises still exist like unsafePerformIO that you can't detect
simply by looking at the types of functions.
In order to live up to the hype and the marketing
2010/7/31 David Leimbach leim...@gmail.com:
Haskell's great and all but it does have a few warts when it comes to how
much real trust one should put into the type system.
Some compromises still exist like unsafePerformIO that you can't detect
simply by looking at the types of functions.
David Leimbach wrote:
Haskell's great and all but it does have a few warts when it comes to how
much real trust one should put into the type system.
Some compromises still exist like unsafePerformIO that you can't detect
simply by looking at the types of functions.
In order to live up to the
On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 5:23 PM, David Leimbach leim...@gmail.com wrote:
Does Singularity also have such back doors?
The CLR doesn't load machine code, it loads bytecodes. So it is
possible to statically analyse the module and see hmmm, this module
uses unsafePerformIO, I'll reject it. If the
And note that we wouldn't need unsafePerformIO for the FFI if all
programs were made in Haskell ;).
Perhaps that's true, though entirely unrealistic, in the application
world. In the OS world you need access to machine registers and
special instructions (CR3 anyone? CP15?) which isn't built
Thomas DuBuisson wrote:
And note that we wouldn't need unsafePerformIO for the FFI if all
programs were made in Haskell ;).
Perhaps that's true, though entirely unrealistic, in the application
world. In the OS world you need access to machine registers and
special instructions (CR3 anyone?
On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 8:27 PM, wren ng thornton w...@freegeek.org wrote:
Thomas DuBuisson wrote:
And note that we wouldn't need unsafePerformIO for the FFI if all
programs were made in Haskell ;).
Perhaps that's true, though entirely unrealistic, in the application
world. In the OS world
Probably a more poignant question would be a comparison of Haskell's type
system and Sing#'s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sing_sharp).
Vasili
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 5:19 PM, Vasili I. Galchin vigalc...@gmail.comwrote:
Hello,
In the latest ACM CACM is a paper on Singularity. Here also
11 matches
Mail list logo
