On 8/30/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dan Piponi writes: > > In Haskell, there is no box. > > Well, there are boxes... > But there also thunks and latent, yet-unevaluated graphs...
But the point of Haskell is to provide an abstraction that hides these details from you. (Though ultimately it's a leaky abstraction and there comes a point where you do need to know about these things.) > Anyway, I believe strongly that ALL people who have problems with the > Haskell protocole, and they are numerous, I teach a good sample of them, > should be encouraged to learn Prolog. I'd second that. It's hard to see the difference between declarative and imperative programming when you only have one instance of a declarative language from which to generalise. -- Dan _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
