|
I suspect many of us are dying to ask: Why not just use Haskell? -Paul Luke Evans wrote: It could be for a subset of Haskell (probably a large one). Haskell has some features that CAL does not (many just syntactic sugar, some not) – we’re actually working on a short paper to summarise the differences, primarily for people on this list. Even without a one-to-one correspondence, this might work in many situations where special lower level CAL could be generated in lieu of higher-level Haskell features. Still, you would probably be able to go a very long way with not much more than straightforward syntax transformations. Of course, use of Haskell libraries would either have to be mapped to CAL ones, or the Haskell library functions converted themselves (with this treatment applied recursively to dependees). |
_______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
