I applaud the intention of the Haskerl group to make the use of Haskell
easier and, in the same spirit, I would like to suggest some further
extensions to make "literate" programming easier.
Most Haskell users (and certainly all Haskell compiler writers) also
use LaTeX, so I suggest that literat
I know it's late in the day for most of you (or already tomorrow),
but a colleague of mine here at Los Alamos has made a suggestion
I just have to pass along:
Will Partain writes
|We might then match against a list of Foos (type "[Foo]") as follows:
|
|case expr of
| /^{Foo1 _ {4}}({Foo
I would like to congratulate Mr. Partain on this visionary proposal.
The time is right for such a language. I was particularly excited by
the FWIM syntax but I would like to go even further and suggest that
we consider including support for dc syntax[1]. This often-neglected
language represents
Non-strict, purely-functional languages, such as Haskell [1], are
perceived to be inadequate for everyday, get-the-job-done tasks; in
particular, they are seen to be "bad at I/O". Consequently, an
informal working group has been designing an extended variant of
Haskell to address these requirem
Non-strict, purely-functional languages, such as Haskell [1], are
perceived to be inadequate for everyday, get-the-job-done tasks; in
particular, they are seen to be "bad at I/O". Consequently, an
informal working group has been designing an extended variant of
Haskell to address
| Lennart Augustsson (Chalmers) writes, "I haven't started adding
| Haskerl to LML/HBC, but it shouldn't take long. By FPCA definitely."
As Lennart was heard decrying excessive monadery as recently as September,
I'm pleased to hear he's gotten on the bandwagon. That he's given himself
over two
