> 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
