On 7 Oct 2009, at 15:04, John A. De Goes wrote:
On Oct 7, 2009, at 3:13 AM, Ketil Malde wrote:
Peter Verswyvelen <bugf...@gmail.com> writes:
So yes, without using IO, Haskell forces you into this safe spot
One could argue that IO should be broken down into a set of "sub-
monads"
encapsulating various subsets of the functionality - file system,
network access, randomness, and so on. This could extend the "safe
spot" to cover much more computational real estate, and effectively
sandbox programs in various ways.
Good idea in theory, in practice I suspect it would lead to
unmanageable boilerplate.
Aye, but today's boilerplate is tomorrow's language design.
Cheers
Conor
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
