Jan Skibinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
First off, from what I remember of it, I like the BAP, too, having
stumbled over the limitation of the Haskell types a couple of times.
> + What extra features would be really desired and, first of
> all - WHY? How will it make Haskell more useful
> from math-oriented application perspective?
Without making it totally arcane for the non-math-orienteds! Having
Num is nice, exactly since it's *not* rigidly defined. If you have
function signatures with CommutativeGroup and LeftModule, people are
going to drop off.
OTOH, the mathematician will be very comfortable with functions
defined over groups or rings or fields, and it is objectively the more
accurate way to specify function signatures.
-kzm
--
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
