Re: Felleisen on Standard Haskell

[John O'Donnell]

About the Great Debate on the name of Standard Haskell:

Simon PJ wrote:
>  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 expresses something I disliked all along about the Standard Haskell 
project: to me, this name sounds like the final, best Haskell, the end of the 
road.  So it sounds like Haskell 2 should have a completely different name, 
which would be a bad idea.  We don't want to confuse the outside world.

How about simply "Standard Haskell 1"?  This makes sense: it *is* the end of 
the road for Haskell 1.x, and it leaves room for Haskell 2.x, Haskell 3.x, and 
even (if people want them) "Standard Haskell 2", etc.

John O'Donnell