On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 22:34 -0500, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote: > There's something I'm missing in all of this. > > Perl is in the process of rebooting itself (perl6 is syntactically > very different from perl5; the closest it's ever previously gotten to > this kind of radical change was the change from ' to :: as the package > separator). Perl5 will continue to exist, and probably even be > maintained. So why is it not possible to declare Haskell98 and > Haskell10 (or whatever Haskell' becomes) as stable, maintained > languages for production use, then reboot the Haskell development > process?
Right, that's what I want. (Although perl6 has been a long time in coming). Haskell is, far and away, the best name I can think of for the next mainstream research language. I just don't think it's going to happen. > In fact, I thought that was the reason Haskell98 support is > retained in Haskell compilers? jcc _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
