I agree that "statically typed" comes with a lot of Java/C++ baggage. Is there some way of saying "really statically typed", or "uncoercable immutable statically typed values"?
-deech
Ketil Malde <ketil <at> malde.org> writes:
I agree that it is important to highlight the features that are characteristic
>
> Don Stewart <dons <at> galois.com> writes:
>
> >> Good start, if only the "advanced" were replaced with something more
> >> characteristic, like "lazy", or "statically typed". Which, BTW, both do not
>
> > "lazy" and "statically typed" don't mean much to other people. They are
> > buzz words that mean nothing to many people.
>
> But they /are/ defining characteristics of the language, still. I think
> they should be mentioned, ideally as links to separate pages (or
> pop-ups or a "live" sidebar?) that explain what they mean, and why you'd
> want them.
>
> -k
of the language. However, I would add that "statically typed" is a turn-off for
some people, so I think it is important to add "with type inference".
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe