RE: Felleisen on Standard Haskell

[Frank A. Christoph]

>That's just what I intend to do.  I don't see Std Haskell as a big
>deal, but even little deals are worth completing rather than
>leaving as loose ends... and I'm more optimistic than Paul about
>the usefulness of Std Haskell.  I would be happy to find a name
>that was less grand and final-sounding than 'Standard Haskell' though;
>but more final sounding than 'Haskell 1.5'.

That sounds like a good idea.  But why don't we just be honest and call it
Haskell--?  (Or maybe "(-1) Haskell"? :) Unfortunately, that's not even a
legal section because of the funny rules for unary minus...)  Hm...
"Pre-Haskell"?

--FC