Colin Runciman writes:
> Names including a date, like Haskell 98, ... could mislead.
How would this be misleading? A number of other languages use it to
mark points in their ongoing development (Fortran, Ada, ML,...), and
it seems to communicate just about the right message.
To anyone unfamiliar with the history and development of the
language, Haskell '98 has some external meaning; unlike 1.5 (or 2--
or Standard 1). After next January it will also suggest that the
language is fixed, again without requiring any inside knowledge.
Being comprehensible to an audience broader than the current Haskell
community is important.
Taking the two-digit year suggests a lifetime for Haskell '98 of
more than a year and less than a century, which seems safe enough.
Ian
On Stable & Current Haskell, what is going to happen when we next
want to take a marker on Current Haskell? Will it split into Stable
Current Haskell and Current Current Haskell?
