On 10/16/10 11:22 AM, Ben Franksen wrote:
Much better. Though I *do* think mentioning the main implementations and
their qualities is a good thing to o, right after this:
"[...]The most
important Haskell implementation, ghc [like to ghc page], has served as a
test bed for practical application of cutting egde research into the
language as well as its compilation to efficiently executable code."
Objection to calling GHC the most "important". The most mature, most
fully featured, most common, or even the standard implementation,, sure.
But saying GHC is more important than the rest implies that (among
others) the work on JHC and UHC is "unimportant". To the contrary, I
think JHC and UHC are, perhaps, more important than GHC precisely
because they are treading new waters that the standard implementation
cannot afford to explore.
--
Live well,
~wren
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
