> That book is about teaching Haskell, not advertising it. If I wanted > to advertise how cool Haskell was, I probably wouldn't dwell on lists. > But to learn Haskell, I spent the first few years doing either list > processing or very simple algebraic data types, and I think it made me > a better programmer as a result. > > If you want to program Haskell, get the basics sorted. Once you have > sorted the basics of functional programming, you can move on to the > Haskell specific bits. The course I learnt from at York left out > things such as modules, type classes (beyond slight Eq/Ord > signatures), monads, IO (other than interact) and anything not in > Haskell 98. What it did cover very well was functional programming and > functional reasoning.
Of course, after teaching these bits, say towards the end of a course or in a Real World Haskell book, the extra Haskell bits should definately be covered! They are what makes a Haskell programmer, but not what makes a functional programmer. Thanks Neil _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe