On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Koray Can wrote:
I can imagine once one gets used to them, they don't pose any problems.
Nevertheless, while I still learn, these names are quite awkward for me
to read and talk about haskell.
Yep, I agree absolutely.
I searched the mailing list archives for a
On 23-Dec-2003, Sean L. Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It occurs to me that Haskell would be quite a bit easier for OO and
traditional programmers to grasp if Haskell would actually use the
correct, or at least more commonly used, names for things.
For instance,
data Maybe a = Nothing |
That was quite a satisfying explanation, thank you. That is certainly
clearing a few things up.
Sean
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 26, 2003 3:07 AM
Subject: Re: Haskell naming conventions
G'day all.
Quoting Lennart
G'day all.
Quoting Lennart Augustsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
According to dictionary.com one of the definitions of the word class is:
A set, collection, group, or configuration containing members regarded
as having certain attributes or traits in common; a kind or category.
And what the
Sean L. Palmer wrote:
class Eq a where
(==) :: a - a - Bool
That actually declares a /type class/, not a class. So why the use of
the keyword class? Is it done merely to confuse C++ and Java
programmers? The concept of type class in Haskell apparently roughly
corresponds to the
On Dec 24, 2003, at 2:29 AM, Sean L. Palmer wrote:
It occurs to me that Haskell would be quite a bit easier for OO and
traditional programmers to grasp if Haskell would actually use the
correct, or at least more commonly used, names for things.
I don't think changing a few keywords will have
It occurs to me that Haskell would be quite a bit
easier for OO and traditional programmers to grasp if Haskell would actually use
the correct, or at least more commonly used, names for things.
For instance,
data Maybe a = Nothing | Just
a
Maybe is a type
constructor and Nothing and Just
to all: excuse my bad english.
to javas: excuse my extreme opinions. - regard me as s.o. of an other... religion.
to newbies: read it.
to haskellers: you don't need to.
johi, Sean.
i remember that i've had the same problems with haskell, at the beginning.
you are right, that there should be a
