Re: Void type in base

On 7/17/13 3:48 PM, David Luposchainsky wrote:

+1 in genereal. A few remarks:

I'm also +1 for the proposal.

1. We don't live in a C world.

Agreed. It's bad enough that C taught people to believe that "void" means the unit return type. But C aficionados will have to relearn all their terminology anyways when coming to Haskell. I don't see how renaming the Void type would really help them. -- Live well, ~wren