On 16/07/2012 13:18, Gábor Lehel wrote:
With apologies for repeating myself, isn't the fact that unsafeRead
and unsafeWrite can access arbitrary memory locations a problem? Does
memory safety not matter?
The definition of safety in Safe Haskell requires type safety, it does
not impose any extra restrictions on what you can do in the IO monad.
In the terminology we use in the paper, the latter is called a
"security" requirement, as distinct from safety. Since security
requirements tend to be application-specific, it wouldn't make sense to
build one into Safe Haskell itself. Safe Haskell is the mechanism on
which you can implement whatever security policy you need - there's an
example in the paper of defining a restricted IO monad for use by
untrusted code.
Cheers,
Simon
_______________________________________________
Haskell-platform mailing list
[email protected]
http://projects.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-platform
