You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
One downside of a verify that returns a bool is that you can forget to call it. One way to mitigate this (until we get Linear Haskell 😄) is to fuse deserialization of the message with verification, something like
#24
Open
arianvp opened this issue
Jun 28, 2020
· 0 comments
One downside of a verify that returns a bool is that you can forget to call it. One way to mitigate this (until we get Linear Haskell 😄) is to fuse deserialization of the message with verification, something like
is there a sensible decode operation for the message to do this with?
A different option would be to return some kind of validity token of which the constructor is not exposed, and to have remaining functions take such a token as input.
One downside of a
verify
that returns a bool is that you can forget to call it. One way to mitigate this (until we get Linear Haskell 😄) is to fuse deserialization of the message with verification, something likeis there a sensible decode operation for the message to do this with?
A different option would be to return some kind of validity token of which the constructor is not exposed, and to have remaining functions take such a token as input.
Originally posted by @ruuda in #23
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: