[Haskell-beginners] Comfortable handling of module hierarchies

[damodar kulkarni]

A feature being "more complicated" for the users to use or for the
implementers to implement cannot be the SOLE reason for that feature to be
discarded. If we consider implementation concerns, then we can see that the
Haskell designers have included many features that are certainly candidates
deserving the title: "very much complicated";

e.g. various constructs from category theory, or
       support for lazy evaluation, or
       features being targeted for the "Data Parallel Haskell"
and so on

In particular, I am interested in knowing whether this feature is in direct
conflict with any other features the Haskell has.

- Damodar

On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Edward Z. Yang <ezyang at mit.edu> wrote:

> Excerpts from damodar kulkarni's message of Sun Sep 16 12:37:41 +0200 2012:
> > Do you know any document pointing out the rationale behind this decision
> > about modules taken by the Haskell designers?
>
> While I don't know about the rationale behind this particular decision,
> Haskell's module system is purposely quite simple.  Languages like ML
> have more complicated module systems which allow the sort of things that
> you mentioned (and more!) but while they are more expressive they are also
> more complicated.
>
> Edward
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/beginners/attachments/20120916/7d78d7ab/attachment.htm>