Fergus Henderson wrote:
>
> On 14-Aug-2000, Benjamin Leon Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Ah, a testable hypothesis! If you are right, then you should be able to
> > provide an example of a language that meets the requirements of writing
> > both low-level kernel code and most user ap
Concerning Int vs. Integer:
Wouldn't it be better if Standard Haskell had "save" Int's, that is a version that
simply
would abort the program when encountering a overflow.
This can be implemented without too much of a penalty on the more relevant benchmarks.
And if Int32 and friends from the H
Scott Turner wrote:
>At 18:08 1998-08-04 +0900, Frank A. Christoph wrote:
>>>[...] 'Standard Haskell' [...] 'Haskell 1.5'.
>>[...] Haskell--? [...] (-1) Haskell [...] Pre-Haskell
>
>Others wrote "Haskell 98" and "Teaching Haskell".
>
>"Haskell 2000" uses a nice, round number that is close enoug
