[Haskell-cafe] Re: Is there anyone out there who can translate C# generics into Haskell?

[Jonathan Cast]

On 6 Jan 2008, at 2:13 AM, Achim Schneider wrote:

> Jonathan Cast <jonathanccast at fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
>> On 4 Jan 2008, at 2:00 AM, Nicholls, Mark wrote:
>>
>>> You may be right...but learning is not an atomic thing....wherever I
>>> start I will get strange things happening.
>>
>> The best place to start learning Haskell is with the simplest type
>> features, not the most complicated.  And it's the simplest features
>> that are most unlike OO.
>>
>> Yes, Haskell will be `strange'.  But if you think you're `the
>> intersection' between Haskell and OO, you'll think things are
>> familiar, and you'll be surprised when they turn  out to be
>> different.  I'd concentrate on watching out for differences --- but
>> then I can't imagine how finding `familiar' ideas would help.
>>
> just a sec...
>
> things like

<C++ translated into Haskell>

> come to mind.
>
> But then this has more to do with Monads than with classes. IO, in
> particular, and GL and GLUT, which are state machines and
> thus predestined for OOP.

Your example is very unintuitive and unidiomatic Haskell.  The  
reference to GL makes me think this is for a `low-level' binding to  
an imperative library, no?  Those are scarcely good places to learn  
Haskell.

jcc