>Indeed, I do expect that most of the people on this list will
>go straight to (the moving target of) Haskell 2. The purpose of
>Std Haskell is to address the needs of people who don't need the
>latest greatest, but do need something stable. For example,
>the fact that Haskell keeps moving (which in many ways is good)
>discourages people from writing books, which in turn makes it
>less attractive for people who aren't already converted.
This argument is somewhat of a red herring. For example Richard Bird's
new book does not touch any of the more advanced subjects, i.e.
his book is backwards compatible with adding multiple parameter
type classes, existentials, scoped type variables and all those other
nice things. On the other hand Paul Hudak's book explains Monad
comprehensions. In fact, 120 students at Utrecht University
and who knows how many at Yale now expect that Haskell has
Monad comprehensions, so taking them out of Standard Haskell
will cause problems.
> Simon "desparately trying to keep the lid on the can of worms" PJ
Beware of the herring worm:
Anisakis simplex (herring worm), Pseudoterranova (Phocanema,
Terranova) decipiens (cod or seal worm), Contracaecum spp.,
and Hysterothylacium (Thynnascaris) spp. are anisakid nematodes
(roundworms) that have been implicated in human infections
caused by the consumption of raw or undercooked language design.
To date, only A. simplex and P. decipiens are reported from
human cases in North America.
