At 06:22 PM 2/14/99 +0100, you wrote:
>Dear Colleges.
>
>Quite a few proposals for Haskell 2 have been posted on this list. I
>think, however, that before we dwell into great detail with the next
>generation of our language, we need to define our goals clearly. What do
>we want to archive with Haskell 2?
>
>If you have a
>module that defines, say, a "data" type:
>
>data Foo = Bar | Fubar
>
>there is no way to extend this type in another module.
>
...
>There are two quite different ways out of this. Either we make data
>types extendible or we introduce dynamic binding of functions.
...
>Joergen Froejk Kjaersgaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Systems Engineer, Informaticon
>...Linux - for freedom of choice... www.linux.org
>
Dear Colleagues,
I am totally opposed to "dynamic" binding in Haskell. It goes
totally against the grain of what I understand Haskell to be.
Best Regards,
Byron Hale
Effective Information
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(408)358-8064
