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
Haskell-platform@projects.haskell.org
http://projects.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-platform

Reply via email to