At the risk of opening old wounds: why weren't ML/FX style modules
included in Haskell? I can think of a number of possible reasons, but
I'm interested in the "official" reason for leaving out such an
important feature.
Other committee members may have different recollections, but here's
mine: no one really thought the extra complexity was worth it. Before
you or others tell me that I'm wrong, or that type classes are at least
as complex yet we adopted them, let me just say that I'm giving my
honest recollection of the sentiment as I perceived it 3 years ago.
Everyone now acknowledges that Haskell's modules are the weakest part
of the language, and people are working on ways to fix that (yes,
someday I hope there will be a Haskell 2).
-Paul
---
Professor Paul Hudak
Department of Computer Science
Yale University
New Haven, CT 06520
(203) 432-4715
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
