Re: Non-H98 crusade, contd.

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005, Malcolm Wallace wrote:

Sven Panne writes:

...

OK, let's try to summarize what seems to be the current consensus about more or less conservative & settled extensions to Haskell98:

There is a larger point to consider. We should remember that revising the Haskell language is not only about extending it, but also about removing dead/ugly features, and changing features that are wrong or inconsistent.

Yes, fight against diabetes! :-] Modula-3 was designed to let the language definition fit in 50 pages - that's a serious goal. Since Haskell doesn't need many features of imperative languages like variables, constants, loops, etc. there is more space for type issues, and this goal still seems to be realizable for Haskell, too.