Re: [Haskell-cafe] an idea for modifiyng data/newtype syntax: use `::=` instead of `=`
On 9 août 2015, at 15:00, haskell-cafe-request@haskell.org wrote:
From: Will Yager <will.yager@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] an idea for modifiyng data/newtype syntax: use `::=` instead of `=` Date: 9 août 2015 02:30:50 UTC+3 To: Hilco Wijbenga <hilco.wijbenga@gmail.com> Cc: Haskell Cafe <haskell-cafe@haskell.org>, MigMit <miguelimo38@yandex.ru>
It is worth asking, then, if we should record these small aesthetic suggestions somewhere for consideration while designing the next major compatibility-breaking release of the Haskell specification (Haskell 2020 or what have you).
+1 Alexey.
On Sun, Aug 09, 2015 at 09:12:31PM +0300, Alexey Muranov wrote:
On 9 août 2015, at 15:00, haskell-cafe-request@haskell.org wrote:
From: Will Yager <will.yager@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] an idea for modifiyng data/newtype syntax: use `::=` instead of `=` Date: 9 août 2015 02:30:50 UTC+3 To: Hilco Wijbenga <hilco.wijbenga@gmail.com> Cc: Haskell Cafe <haskell-cafe@haskell.org>, MigMit <miguelimo38@yandex.ru>
It is worth asking, then, if we should record these small aesthetic suggestions somewhere for consideration while designing the next major compatibility-breaking release of the Haskell specification (Haskell 2020 or what have you).
+1
Very much +1
El Aug 9, 2015, a las 16:04, Tom Ellis <tom-lists-haskell-cafe-2013@jaguarpaw.co.uk> escribió:
On Sun, Aug 09, 2015 at 09:12:31PM +0300, Alexey Muranov wrote:
On 9 août 2015, at 15:00, haskell-cafe-request@haskell.org wrote:
From: Will Yager <will.yager@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] an idea for modifiyng data/newtype syntax: use `::=` instead of `=` Date: 9 août 2015 02:30:50 UTC+3 To: Hilco Wijbenga <hilco.wijbenga@gmail.com> Cc: Haskell Cafe <haskell-cafe@haskell.org>, MigMit <miguelimo38@yandex.ru>
It is worth asking, then, if we should record these small aesthetic suggestions somewhere for consideration while designing the next major compatibility-breaking release of the Haskell specification (Haskell 2020 or what have you).
+1
Very much +1
I have to say, I'm very -1 on what sounds like a Perl 6 or Python 3 endeavor. Small and incremental seems to demonstrably be the way to make breaking changes. tom
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
On Sun, Aug 09, 2015 at 04:48:25PM -0400, amindfv@gmail.com wrote:
El Aug 9, 2015, a las 16:04, Tom Ellis <tom-lists-haskell-cafe-2013@jaguarpaw.co.uk> escribió:
On Sun, Aug 09, 2015 at 09:12:31PM +0300, Alexey Muranov wrote:
On 9 août 2015, at 15:00, haskell-cafe-request@haskell.org wrote:
From: Will Yager <will.yager@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] an idea for modifiyng data/newtype syntax: use `::=` instead of `=` Date: 9 août 2015 02:30:50 UTC+3 To: Hilco Wijbenga <hilco.wijbenga@gmail.com> Cc: Haskell Cafe <haskell-cafe@haskell.org>, MigMit <miguelimo38@yandex.ru>
It is worth asking, then, if we should record these small aesthetic suggestions somewhere for consideration while designing the next major compatibility-breaking release of the Haskell specification (Haskell 2020 or what have you).
+1
Very much +1
I have to say, I'm very -1 on what sounds like a Perl 6 or Python 3 endeavor. Small and incremental seems to demonstrably be the way to make breaking changes.
My +1 was to keeping a record of small but breaking changes that, if made at inception, would have benefitted what Haskell is now. What anyone else wants to *do* with such a record is up to them. Tom
On Sunday, August 9, 2015 at 11:53:35 PM UTC+3, Tom Ellis wrote:
My +1 was to keeping a record of small but breaking changes that, if made at inception, would have benefitted what Haskell is now. What anyone else wants to *do* with such a record is up to them.
A separate +1 to this emphasis on keeping track of possible or desired (even if unfeasible) improvements. Here is my another argument for this: academic papers about Haskell or functional programming do not have to keep to the actual Haskell syntax. IMO, they could benefit in clarity by switching to some pseudo-Haskell with `:` instead of `::` for typing, `::=` instead of `=` in `data` definition, etc: the description language of the underlying abstraction should be independent from the current implementation syntax. Alexey.
So that copy-pasting from the paper to the interpreter would result in compilation failures. Bravo. 10.08.2015, 12:22, "Alexey Muranov" <alexey.muranov@gmail.com>:
On Sunday, August 9, 2015 at 11:53:35 PM UTC+3, Tom Ellis wrote:
My +1 was to keeping a record of small but breaking changes that, if made at inception, would have benefitted what Haskell is now. What anyone else wants to *do* with such a record is up to them.
A separate +1 to this emphasis on keeping track of possible or desired (even if unfeasible) improvements.
Here is my another argument for this: academic papers about Haskell or functional programming do not have to keep to the actual Haskell syntax. IMO, they could benefit in clarity by switching to some pseudo-Haskell with `:` instead of `::` for typing, `::=` instead of `=` in `data` definition, etc: the description language of the underlying abstraction should be independent from the current implementation syntax.
Alexey. ,
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
On 10 août 2015, at 12:28, Miguel Mitrofanov <miguelimo38@yandex.ru> wrote:
So that copy-pasting from the paper to the interpreter would result in compilation failures. Bravo.
I was talking about academic papers,, not about programmers' blog posts. Alexey.
Me too. They usually contain quite a lot of usable, or, at least, runnable code. 10.08.2015, 12:30, "Alexey Muranov" <alexey.muranov@gmail.com>:
On 10 août 2015, at 12:28, Miguel Mitrofanov <miguelimo38@yandex.ru> wrote:
So that copy-pasting from the paper to the interpreter would result in compilation failures. Bravo.
I was talking about academic papers,, not about programmers' blog posts.
Alexey.
On 10/08/2015, at 9:22 pm, Alexey Muranov <alexey.muranov@gmail.com> wrote:
Here is my another argument for this: academic papers about Haskell or functional programming do not have to keep to the actual Haskell syntax.
Very often they do not.
participants (5)
-
Alexey Muranov -
amindfv＠gmail.com -
Miguel Mitrofanov -
Richard A. O'Keefe -
Tom Ellis