Re^6: Why do people say 'Perl' is dead?!?!

So all this is supposed to be another way to interface the purely functional stuff with the rest of the world without the use of monads? Do you have any links to a longer explanation? It's been years since I did work with a purely functional language and it was (Concurrent) Clean which takes a wholly different approach to IO in a purely functional language, but I'd still like to learn more.

Jenda
Enoch was right!
Enjoy the last years of Rome.

Comment on Re^6: Why do people say 'Perl' is dead?!?!

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^7: Why do people say 'Perl' is dead?!?! by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Dec 13, 2011 at 03:40 UTC
So all this is supposed to be another way to interface the purely functional stuff with the rest of the world without the use of monads? No. As far as I can tell, the author that originated thread containing the post I linked was attempting to achieve something akin to taint-checking vai a mechanism he dubbed "Intent typing", which doesn't seem to appear on the internet outside of his reference. However, as I attempted to describe, the concept of "Unsafe" in Haskell goes much deeper. A salient reference: This is the "back door" into the IO monad, allowing IO computation to be performed at any time. Unfortunately, it leaves out the explanation of why it is necessary to incorporate this "backdoor" into the language. With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday' Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error. "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. The start of some sanity?	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^7: Why do people say 'Perl' is dead?!?!
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Dec 13, 2011 at 03:40 UTC

So all this is supposed to be another way to interface the purely functional stuff with the rest of the world without the use of monads?

No. As far as I can tell, the author that originated thread containing the post I linked was attempting to achieve something akin to taint-checking vai a mechanism he dubbed "Intent typing", which doesn't seem to appear on the internet outside of his reference.

However, as I attempted to describe, the concept of "Unsafe" in Haskell goes much deeper. A salient reference: This is the "back door" into the IO monad, allowing IO computation to be performed at any time.

Unfortunately, it leaves out the explanation of why it is necessary to incorporate this "backdoor" into the language.

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

The start of some sanity?

[reply]