[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

[Haskell-cafe] Re: Pure extremism (was: Re: Why?)

Subject: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Pure extremism was: Re: Why?
From: Jason Dusek
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2009 16:49:54 -0800
2009/12/12 Luke Palmer <[email protected]>:
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 7:07 PM, Jason Dusek <[email protected]> wrote:
> >ÂWhere do we draw the line between "machinery" and "packages"?
> >ÂThe types don't tell us what libraries we need.
>
> ...you might mean what *haskell* libraries does a piece of
> code depend on?

  Yes, that's what I mean.

>ÂTo address that, note that I consider a statement like:
>
> import Control.Monad.State
>
> As a form of impurity in a sense...

  It's not referentially transparent, that's for sure.

> I have brainstormed solutions to this problem while thinking about my
> (currently on hold or dead) Udon project...

  I remember reading about that.

  As regards the object identity problem, say we just talk about
  uniquely naming bytestrings. Well, different bytestrings are
  different so they are "their own name"; if we don't want to
  compare them via substring matching, though, then we need a
  consensus algorithm to name them identically across nodes on
  the WAN.

  I wonder if a solipsistic internal namespace is not a workable
  solution? My repo knows objects (patches) I created as having
  unqualified names; objects from your computer are labelled
  as "Luke's repo/..." and vice versa. The repo can be garbage
  collected for patches that are actually the same by background
  string equality checks.

  As someone -- I think it was you? -- suggested on the list a
  little while ago, the chance of hash collision is not zero.

--
Jason Dusek
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>