Hello, Just to mention I have added some ideas for "Elementary" and "Intermediate" in the list of topics as well. Alongside some other issues, there are three things for which I can't see an obvious solution. * Can we provide meaningful examples of pattern matching on lists without making use of recursive algorithms? At first I the possibility of moving the "Recursion" chapter to Basics, just after "Tuples and Lists", and use the context to introduce x:xs - but that would kind of defeat the pedagogical proposal of emphasizing function composition before considering in more depth the "inner workings" of functions. The most adequate alternative, then, would be to mention pattern matching on lists only *very* briefly, I guess... (A related observation. Apfelmus' proposal includes a "Working with lists" module in Basics which would be dedicated entirely to list comprehensions. Initially I wondered whether discussing map and filter in that context would be an improvement. Doing so, however, would immediately make it necessary to push, at the very least, "Recursion" to Basics as a prerequisite. Having both map, filter and recursion in Basics would likely make things too clunky. I also wonder if this decision on how far to delve into lists in Basics would have any significant effects in the "Building a Vocabulary" module.) * I am slightly bothered by having "More on Functions" and "Control Structures" only at the end of "Elementary Haskell". "Control Structures" should probably be after "Pattern Matching" anyway, even more so now that we're presenting case structures for the first time. As for "More on Functions", I feel moving it to an earlier point (just after "Recursion", maybe) could improve reading flow (IMO increased alternation of "syntactic" and "conceptual" modules makes for a less tiring read). Furthermore, it would allow us to make occasional use of lambdas, prefixed operators and similar things in the following chapters without worrying with pre-requisites (and, at the same time, helping readers to, through small doses, get used to the syntactic variants). Regards, Daniel Mlot P.S.: Apfelmus: Nice thought to have added examples to the cheat sheets. I only fear they can grow a bit too wide sometimes, but in such cases nothing stops us from putting a "see on the detailed explanation" note there :)