Jacob B Schwartz wrote:
> > - Built in dynamic typing system.
>
> Huh? Typing in Haskell is static. Liek I said, this removes a lot
> of run time errors. It also has performance benefits!! You don't have
> to store tags on all your data objects! And you don't have to spend
> time checking them! Time and space savings! How can you beat that?
>
As I told Alex:
By a built in dynamic type system I mean being able to safely recover
types from an existential collection using a runtime check.
> - A solution to the abilities arising from multi parameter type classes.
>
> I also think this is due to your not thinking like a Haskell programmer.
> Of course if you use the language like it were C++ then you're gonna
> hit a point where you ask why Haskell doesn't provide you with the
> C++ thing that you want. Plus, there are tons of ways around this.
> I mean, you probably use this every day:
>
> 5 + 1.0
>
> and it works, even though one side is a Float and one side is an
> Integer, and the Eq class only works on one type. It's called
> "fromInteger".
Um NO! This is a servious problem that most people are very aware of.
In fact Mark P. Jones just informed me that he has a solution that will
be appeating in Hugs VERY soon.
>
> > - Syntactic sugar for supporting OO programming styles
>
> Eh, syntactic sugar. No one's going to argue over this. If you
> can write a preprocessor to do the conversion, then it's up to
> the people who write the compilers to offer it or not.
Preprocessors are a mess and a good language will not need it.
--
Kevin Atkinson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://metalab.unc.edu/kevina/
