Freezing Haskell?

[Klaus Georg BarthelmannypHhgMxU:/home/barthel/nsmail/]

Hi!

The wish to freeze Haskell with the next version came as a complete
surprise to me (only an occasional user). Isn't the present state very
unsatisfactory?
- Monads were introduced but, in my opinion, aren't yet fully
  integrated. They should be more pervasive. (Those who don't like
  further developments probably disagree here.)
- Everybody needs multi-parameter constructor classes, as I learned from
  this discussion list.
- There are nice features like existential types ready to be included.
- As a matter of fact, nobody really likes the module system.
- The n+k pattern controversy isn't settled. It seems to me that
  freezing the language is an unfair attempt to cut off the discussion.
- ...
If all these questions should be resolved until version 1.5, will they
be frozen then without further testing?

I guess that version 1.4 prompted most of this discussion. Has there
ever been a new version with so little improvements? As was suggested
by others, perhaps the Minimum Time Between Updates should be bounded
below. This would serve programmers better. I see no difference between
naming an improved version "Haskell 1.6" or completetly differently.

Best regards,
  Klaus

-- 
Klaus Barthelmann, Johannes Gutenberg-Universit"at, Institut f"ur
Informatik,
Postfach 3980, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
[EMAIL PROTECTED]