Is there any particular reason IO functions in the standard libraries aren't grouped into type-classes?
This might allow for: 1) Testing IO code without actual input and output. (I have done this on a small scale, but it presently involves much ugliness). 2) Redirecting output of a function that neglects to take a handle without a bunch of calls to dup. 3) Forwarding IO over a connection to a remote system, allowing code written to work locally to be applied remotely, or vice-versa. 4) Wrapping dangerous IO actions in additional sanity checks. Thoughts?
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
