Primitive types and Prelude shenanigans
Fri, 16 Feb 2001 17:14:14 +1100
On 15-Feb-2001, William Lee Irwin III <email@example.com> wrote:
> Some reasonable assumptions:
I disagree about the reasonableness of many of your assumptions ;-)
> (1) lists are largely untouchable
I want to be able to write a Prelude that has lists as a strict data
type, rather than a lazy data type.
> (4) I/O libs will probably not be toyed with much (monads are good!)
> (5) logical values will either be a monotype or a pointed set class
> (may be too much to support more than a monotype)
I think that that replacing the I/O libs is likely to be a much more
useful and realistic proposition than replacing the boolean type.
> (9) probably no one will try to alter application syntax to operate
> on things like instances of class Applicable
That's a separate issue; you're talking here about a language
extension, not just a new Prelude.
> (10) the vast majority of the prelude changes desirable to support
> will have to do with the numeric hierarchy
s/numeric hierarchy/class hierarchy/
Fergus Henderson <firstname.lastname@example.org> | "I have always known that the pursuit
| of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.