Re: [Haskell] why don't we have const Ptrs?

On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 06:35:55PM -0500, David Roundy wrote:

then I wouldn't have a guarantee that strcat isn't specialized for writeable Ptrs, in which case it might have the result of modifying a pointer when I don't want it to. Admittedly, this isn't a likely scenario, but when I have the typechecker check something, I'd like it to give me a guarantee, with the usual caveat that certain "unsafe" functions aren't called. Does the RULES pragma fall in that "unsafe" category?

RULES are in the very unsafe category. you can cause the compiler itself to bottom out using them. John -- John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈