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

jerzy.karczmarczuk at info.unicaen.fr jerzy.karczmarczuk at info.unicaen.fr
Mon Jan 14 19:29:50 EST 2008

Ben Franksen writes: 

> jerzy.karczmarczuk at info.unicaen.fr wrote:
>> Does *MATH* answer the question what is: (0/0)==(0/0) ? Nope!
> Exactly. So why try to give an answer in Haskell? MATH says: the 
> expression 0/0 is undefined, thus comparing (0/0)==(0/0) is undefined, 
> too. I would expect Haskell to say the same.

I don't know whether you are serious, or you are pulling my leg...
Let's suppose that it is serious. 

When math says that something is undefined, in my little brain I understand
that there is no answer.
NO answer. 

Is this the "undefined" you want to have? The bottom non-termination? Now,
this is obviously the *worst* possible reaction of the system, the IEEE
indefinite is much better, at least you know what had happened. 

Would you propose the non-termination as the issue of all "errors", such as
negative argument to the real sqrt, etc?
Well, as you wish... But don't write medical software, please... 

Jerzy Karczmarczuk 

More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list