Malcolm Wallace wrote:
Wolfgang Jeltsch <g9ks1...@acme.softbase.org> wrote:
The Yampa people and I (the Grapefruit maintainer) already agreed to
introduce a top-level FRP namespace instead of putting FRP under
Control or whatever.
The problem with a top-level namespace like FRP is that it is a cryptic
acronym: it means nothing to a novice, and may be easily confused with
other acronyms by an expert. I believe top-level names should _at_the_
_very_least_ be minimally descriptive of the category of things that
live in it.
So, I'd be fine with Control.Reactive.FRP, Control.Reactive.Yampa, etc,
or even just Reactive.Yampa etc.
Besides, it hardly seems necessary to emphasize "Functional" and
"Programming" in the Haskell context...
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
Haskell@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
