On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 12:14:36AM +0100, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > Magnus Therning schrieb: > >There is of course the possibility that Haskell would bring a whole slew > >of yet-to-be-determined security issues. I doubt it will be worse than > >C though. > > Haskell might be prone to denial-of-service attacks. E.g. sending it > data that cause it to evaluate an infinite data structure.
That would be a bug in the implementation of an algorithm, not an inherent Haskell problem. > Still, I'd want to have the results of a strictness analysis attached to > Haskell software. Why? In case the strictness analyzer was buggy? > Then again, avoiding global state and using a language with garbage > collection, a strong type discipline and checked pointer dereferencing > (say: Java, Ruby, Python, whatever) would probably go a far way towards > safer software, even if it's not an FPL. But implementing deeply mathematical concepts in a mathematically oriented language (like Haskell) seems to be a better idea, if only to make the implementation closer to specification. Best regards Tomasz _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
