On 2 Apr 2008, at 14:27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That is possible, of course - I did that, too. But it means that
the syntax and semantics do not work together; an invitation to
pitfalls. So this ought to be avoided, except if there are no
other workarounds.
I am more tolerant.
The pragmatics is to decide whether to program Haskell, or making a
new language. I am interested in the latter, but realistically nobody
will singly be able prdocue the programingg capacity that the now
mature Haskell has.
The question - for me - is not an interplay between
syntax and semantics, ...
That interplay, between notation and notions, is very important in
math, as if the do not flow together, one will not be able to
describe very complex logical structures.
...syntax here is irrelevant, the fact that (+) is a
popular infix operator plays no role. The calamity comes from the
fact that
it is not possible to write serious and "natural" instances of Eq and
Show for functions, ...
A correct Eq would require a theorem prover. Show could be
implemented by writing out the function closures, but I think the
reason it is not there is that it would create overhead in compiled
code.
...and that for God knows which reasons, the Num instance
demands them ! This requirement is not rational, although intuitive.
Probably pragmatics. More general implementations were not considered
at the time.
But
I violated it several times, when I needed arithmetic for lazy
infinite
objects... So, I can't say that this should be avoided. I don't see
"obvious" pitfalls therein.
The pitfall is when somebody which does not know the code well tries
to use it. Define a library with
false = True
true = False
Perfectly logical, but it will be thwarted by peoples expectations.
It would be better to write a new Prelude. :-)
Oh, yes, our common dream...
Such changes will require a new standard. Haskell seems rather fixed,
so it will perhaps then happen in a new language. :-)
Hans
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
