gutti wrote:
I wanted to check whether Haskell offers reasonably easy object oriented programming -- I already had a look into "Haskell's overlooked object system" und "A Gentle Introduction to Haskell 98" [H98]
Its probably a bad idea to try and write Java style OO code in Haskell. Trying to do this with be playing against Haskell's strengths (type safe functional programming) and you will likely find a whole bunch of weakness that regular Haskell programmers never bump into.
2. is OOHaskell the right way to go - is it standardised (H98) or is it extension and is it widely used and recommended ?
It is not widely used, the topic of OOHaskell rarely comes up in this mailing list or on the #haskell IRC channel. Since its not widely used, I would also think its not really recommended.
3. Haskell 98 offers datatypes and some sort of monadic classes -- is it possible to build simple objects without OOHaskell ?
Haskell is not an OO langauge. Trying to write Java style OO code in Haskell will be painful.
4. When I want object properties to change, when should I use IORef when STRef ?
Thats a really, really bad idea. Haskell is designed to be a pure functional language where mutable data is only used in limited circumstances when there is no other way. HTH, Erik -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Erik de Castro Lopo http://www.mega-nerd.com/