John Meacham wrote: > > > > In Haskell, code is data too because code in the sense of > > > > imperative actions is described by IO values. You cannot analyse > > > > them. > > > > > > And thus they are not data. > > > > Huh? I'd say they are not /concrete/ data, but (abstract) data they > > surely are(?) > > and you are certainly free to turn them into concrete data by creating > your own data type which you then can inspect and modify and then > "interpret".
IOW, you are free to write a Lisp interpreter in Haskell. But it's a lot easier to do it in Lisp. That, in a nutshell, is Lisp's key strength. It uses the same structure for code as for data, which makes it very easy to add new language features. -- Glynn Clements <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list Haskell@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
