Nothing to do with the content of the language (Standard) Haskell per se, but if the next revision is going to be the final product of the Haskell Committee, I'd like to encourage its members to at some stage write something up about the decade-long design process. A design rationale would be great, but just as important (and shorter!) would be a from-the-trenches experience report on language design by committee, i.e., what worked, what didn't etc. If nothing else, it could force people to think twice about designing a new language :-) --Sigbjorn
- Re: Standard Haskell Frank Christoph
- Re: Standard Haskell Fergus Henderson
- Re: Standard Haskell Fergus Henderson
- Re: Standard Haskell Wolfgang Beck
- Re: Standard Haskell David Barton
- Re: Standard Haskell Chris Burdorf
- Re: Standard Haskell Hans Aberg
- Standard Haskell John Hughes
- Re: Standard Haskell Hans Aberg
- Re: Standard Haskell David Barton
- Re: Standard Haskell Sigbjorn Finne
- Re: Standard Haskell Tony Davie
- Re: Standard Haskell Hans Aberg
- Re: Standard Haskell David Barton
- Re: Standard Haskell Frank Christoph
- Re: Standard Haskell Frank Christoph
- Re: Standard Haskell Frank Christoph
- Re: Standard Haskell Simon L Peyton Jones
- Re: Standard Haskell Paul Hudak
- Re: standard Haskell Fergus Henderson
- Re: standard Haskell Paul Hudak