>       Have you ever thought about the official definition
>       of Haskell in the introduction to Haskell Report,
>       or in its presentation in FAQ of comp.lang.functional?
>       It sounds like mumbo-jumbo, because all the terms
>       used there are foreign to Joe Programmer. That does
>       not mean that those terms are too damn difficult - they
>       are just simply not defined clearly up front.
..
>       I am not trying to be negative. As a matter of fact I am
>       currently working hard on getting those definitions in some,
>       hopefully logical, perspective - with some clear relashionship
>       amongst them. If I succeed I will publish it on line for a benefit
>       of the Joe Programmer.

There is a Free On-Line Dictionary Of Computing (FOLDOC) at

  http://foldoc.doc.ic.ac.uk/foldoc/index.html

You might consider updating the entries there if you suceed.

Claus


Reply via email to