Re: [m-users.] Impurity needed?
Volker Wysk <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.mercury.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Am Dienstag, dem 21.02.2023 um 21:45 +1100 schrieb Mark Brown: > On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 5:24 AM Volker Wysk <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Am Dienstag, dem 14.02.2023 um 03:11 +1100 schrieb Zoltan Somogyi: > > > 2023-02-14 02:13 GMT+11:00 "Volker Wysk" <[email protected]>: > > > > > It would be trivial to change the signature as you ask. It would also be > > > > > a very bad idea to do so. The point of making an operation a transaction > > > > > is to ensure that only two things can happen: > > > > > > > > > > - the transaction succeeds, and ALL of its effects happen, or > > > > > - the transaction fails, and NONE of its effects happen. > > > > > > > > In my understanding, this applies only to the effects on the database... > > > > > > Consider this sequence modelling an automatic teller machine: > > > > > > 1. Start a transaction. > > > 2. User specifies the account and the amount to withdraw. > > > 3. Teller machine program commands cash dispenser > > > to give out the requested cash. > > > 4. The program subtracts the amount from the account, > > > and discovers that the result is negative. > > > 5. Because of this, the program aborts the transaction. > > > > > > Disregard the fact that the test should have been done before > > > giving out the requested cash. The point I am making is that > > > giving out the cash should happen IF AND ONLY IF the same > > > amount could be deducted from the account. Any violation > > > of that rule either creates or destroys money. Creating money > > > is illegal in most countries unless you are the central bank, > > > and if you are anyone other than the central bank, you probably > > > don't want to pointlessly destroy money either. > > > > > > > > If you allowed I/O in the middle of a transaction, and then later > > > > > it turned out that the transaction cannot succeed, then neither > > > > > of those end states would be reachable. > > > > > > > > So someone using a vanilla imperative language is forbidden to do IO when > > > > being inside a transaction, too -? > > > > > > In imperative language interfaces to DBMSs, there is no practical way to forbid > > > the program to do I/O during a transaction, and, as your use case demonstrates, > > > there are *some* kinds of I/O that you do want to permit. However, saying that > > > database programmers should feel free to do ANY kind of I/O inside transactions > > > is like saying that those programmers should feel free to point ANY device at the > > > users of the database and pull the trigger, whether the device is a water pistol > > > or a flame thrower. > > > > I'm not saying that any kind of IO should be allowed inside transactions. > > But how could a programming language restrict it to the right kinds of > > IO?That isn't possible. It's the responsibility of the programmer to do it > > right. In your example, he has the responsibility to first check the balance > > of the account, before giving out the cash. You have to enable all kinds of > > IO, so the correct ones are possible. > > There's research being done in "coeffects" which I think includes > things such as only allowing certain types of I/O. Mercury's I/O > mechanism can be thought of as a rudimentary coeffect system, and > that's how it's being used in the library, but I think people are also > interested in systems that allow more fine-grained control for > situations like this. As to what's currently possible I'm not sure, > but I take your point about there being a need for at least some kinds > of I/O. Sounds advanced... So you think it would be okay to add the IO state to transactions in the ODBC library? Such that IO in a transaction would be allowed? Of course the programmer needs to be pointed to the fact that his IO actions can't be backtracked. Zoltan said this was a very bad idea... Cheers, Volker _______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mercurylang.org/listinfo/users
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 833 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEE6QXGh82Ov3+2nrxp+K4ydFOsHoUFAmP0xd8ACgkQ+K4ydFOs HoUf+g/8DaFROVxhjAOWJRfB+SDJvEvchvJB0+lBb2LfF2dBI0niWcKxoe49ju48 jn2+Ad0csakia7e2CzX3jbdccRJ803Gm1o70p5e0mToh2cAcUC9LckYW6yY6dPJx 9ckZLFmu+7sR/GL5m12k8WcDvTaJJWIyZ+P/TwMG7c+eCe+9sFHFXhtYiee0bIa1 lbiW4jajbJxn45oFEeI9wueRHTZm5ZIaAGvc2oMtEBD6vadHhW6btc3BxGbf4dqS W3Mn3aK8sw4NrUvy4VKnEgubFlqGtSRdSYueWbdlqAcOjjzSzv3Q2/FwrKoFOcu7 Tm/XXquDwLRr6OwVaLAnFoLlkOaG7s9qriJYrn6RHVxCHpNx/v8DwC+VQjUTVBgJ LmEPpgdM8uu8b/trZLrvUVGeGVkwUWaazkrOBnzOOKTIMlLY/kolpKNBvJcXHVPC DbqQO2TX9Wbs9axflICShKZXzFX+xOv8ukFmy39mXyisfhKfjJQMH0/KFEhYTMbe /D68uLhZ8zhfhMCefiHSo9fKVVhgWFSHol8oyosihhpzLfKvB3IbjDg1qPf432Tg s0mjZ//6DqIoM2bHetlJPd9pPw0BQqca4GKDaHllEKKnmuxOKqTFceCNCr+1tOjq 8xzdPXI8AIpg8tRjValbB6bPkNJ6L6R6tAlmMSd2i4WgTAgzxmU= =gNmx -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----