On Thu, 13 Oct 2005, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: ...
As someone who is not an academic researcher and not a student in CS, I would like to express a personal opinion; we don't need a new standard. To me, Haskell needs more libraries, more users (which means more debugging and more documentations), more implementations, of course more real applications (darcs did a lot of the success of Haskell), so we can read their code, push sysadmins to install Haskell, etc.
A new standard that confirmed that new features in ghc are _not_ standard might go even further in that direction. But I think it's more realistic to hope for the emergence some day of a new, Haskell-like language that does have this real world orientation, as unlikely as that may be, and look at ghc as a fermenting source of ideas and experience that can help make that happen. Donn Cave, donn@drizzle.com