* Henning Thielemann lemm...@henning-thielemann.de [2012-12-01 00:37:12+0100]
We should have multiple implementations before standardization.
Alternative implementations already exist for lots of extenstions, see
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/wiki/HaskellExtensions
Roman
* Tijn van der Zant robot...@gmail.com [2012-12-01 10:00:31+0100]
Why do I need to know about pragmas if it is already difficult to
learn the language?
Exactly. In an ideal world, where the language standard corresponds to
what people perceive as being standard, beginners shouldn't know or care
* Simon Peyton-Jones simo...@microsoft.com [2012-11-30 16:36:01+]
Why not? I don't think it's laziness or selfishness; just look at how
helpful people are on the mailing list. Rather, I am guessing that
it's a subconscious assessment of cost/benefit. The cost is certainly
significant,
2012/12/1 Tijn van der Zant robot...@gmail.com:
I think that there is more to take into account.
Haskell is growing as a language that people use to solve scientific and
business problems. It is starting to become more of a working language,
which is a very good thing of course. But this also
2012/11/30 Gábor Lehel illiss...@gmail.com:
Well, I'm not so sure it's a great idea to just bake what GHC
does at this moment (for any particular extension) into the
standard without really thinking about it. Even then, you have
to figure out, in great detail, what GHC does, and write it
all
The description of transpose in Haskell 2010, section 20.2,
does not tell how unequal-length rows are treated.
A more revealing example would help, perhaps something like
transpose [[1,2],[3],[4,5,6]] == [[1,3,4],[2,5],[6]]
Notice that the usual identities, (transpose x)!!i!!j==x!!j!!i
