Dear Sverker Nilsson,
Thanks for your message - interesting ideas and interesting questions.
[I'm copying the reply to the Haskell mailing list in case anyone
wishes to support your suggestions.]
First, one of Haskell's annoying features is that the scope of a type
variable in a type
On Tue, 12 Sep 1995, Lennart Augustsson wrote:
The posted semantics for strict constructors, illustrated by this example
from the Haskell 1.3 post, is to insert seq.
data R = R !Int !Int
R x y = seq x (seq y (makeR x y)) -- just to show the semantics of R
So if we had
John Hughes mentioned a deficiency of Haskell:
OK, so it's not the exponential of a CCC --- but
Haskell's tuples aren't the product either, and I note the proposal to
change that has fallen by the wayside.
and Phil Wadler urged to either lift BOTH products and functions,
or none of
* Playing around, learning the basics, reinventing the wheel...
I had been playing around with some classes, primarily to learn for
myself, being new to the Haskell language, when I got the report on
the current status of Haskell 1.3. The classes I had played with had
some similarities to some
The design of newtype appears to me incorrect.
The WWW page says that declaring
newtype Foo = Foo Int
is distinct from declaring
data Foo = Foo !Int
(where ! is a strictness annotation) because the former gives
case Foo undefined of Foo _ - True = True
and the
