Some function in the interface *MUST* be tagged unsafe. The current situation is very anti-Haskell. I don't care how efficient it is. First and foremost it must have pure Haskell semantics, otherwise it doesn't belong as a pure function. -- Lennart On Jan 28, 2007, at 23:58 , Tim Docker wrote:
dons@cse.unsw.edu.au wrote:
The functions should document this behaviour better. Of course, you're paying with poke and C strings so you should be careful anyway. I'll correct the documentation to explain all this.
Forgive a non-experts comment:
This approach ("read the doco and be careful when you use these functions") feels contrary to the haskell ethos of pure code being reliably pure. What's the argument for not prefixing such functions with "unsafe"?
Tim _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries