In respone to:
? From: Simon L Peyton Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]
? Subject: Re: Felleisen on Standard Haskell
? Date: Tue, 04 Aug 98 08:54:48 +0100
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
In any case, I hope that Simon will follow his urge to get Standard
Haskell done with Real Soon Now, even if there is no overwhelming
consensus on certain issues, so that we can then concentrate on Haskell
2.
That's just what I intend to do. I don't see Std Haskell as a big
deal, but even
That said, the more I think about it, I don't really believe that
"Standard Haskell" will accomplish much. The fact is that everyone
wants many of the features in Haskell 2, and so even today would prefer
using an implementation that is probably not fully compliant with
anything that is
Simon writes:
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
Simon L Peyton Jones wrote:
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
At 10:12 +0200 98/08/04, Lennart Augustsson wrote:
It's not only people who use Haskell for teaching that want stability.
If you've used Haskell for some real project where the current Haskell
is adequate
...
I think Standard Haskell is a good thing since it opens up
the possibility of making
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
Lennart wrote:
It's not only people who use Haskell for teaching that want stability.
If you've used Haskell for some real project where the current Haskell
is adequate (which, IMHO, is quite a few) you may not want to rewrite
gazillion lines of code.
I'd like to second that. I have two
Simon PJ:
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
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
10 matches
Mail list logo
