> Can some one please fill me in on why existential types are not
> part of Haskell 98? Probably this is answered in some paper/statement
> that I can read some where? I sort of understand them (* I am still
> learning haskell. WOrking through S.T's book right now *) but
> not enough perhaps to know why they are not used.
> I do prefer that the language not get to much semantics from
> its type system, perhaps that the answer is related?
>
> Cheers
As I recall (and one of the Simons is sure to clarify the situation) it
was merely a matter (like MPTC) of "having to draw the line somewhere"
in terms of features to include in the standard. I'm pretty sure it's
due to be in the Haskell 2 (or _whatever_ they end up calling it)
standard.
--ag
--
Artie Gold, Austin, TX
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
"If you come to a fork in the road, take it." -- L.P.Berra
