[Haskell-cafe] Re: Why purely in haskell?

Lennart Augustsson lennart at augustsson.net
Fri Jan 11 10:25:55 EST 2008

That would give you a language with a semantics I don't want to touch.
Sometimes useful, yes, but far to intensional for my taste.

  -- Lennart

On Jan 11, 2008 5:59 AM, Achim Schneider <barsoap at web.de> wrote:

> Yes, thanks. I actually do think that many things would be easier if
> every recursion would be translated to its fixpoint, making the term
> tree completely finite and defining y internal, as it's arcane, black
> magic.
> --
> (c) this sig last receiving data processing entity. Inspect headers for
> past copyright information. All rights reserved. Unauthorised copying,
> hiring, renting, public performance and/or broadcasting of this
> signature prohibited.
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20080111/8cf76918/attachment.htm

More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list