[Haskell-cafe] Re: Richer (than ascii) notation for haskell source?

Patrick Surry Patrick.Surry at portraitsoftware.com
Wed May 14 22:23:59 EDT 2008

Lots of folk have suggested writing code with Unicode symbols, but that
doesn't really get me where I'm thinking of.  Back in the day, I spent
many happy hours writing math(s) in amstex style, peppered with latex
backslash references/macros for greek symbols, set operators as well as
character attributes like underline, bold, goth, italic and so on.  With
the magic of (la)tex and dvips you get a rich intuitive representation
of your equations - where you can 'see' types by character attributes
(bold vectors, gothic sets or whatever) and have easily readable
operators, functions, etc.  Similarly to display alternative pattern
cases as a display equation?  

So maybe what I really want is to essentially write my source in (la)tex
and be able to both compile and render to dvi at the same time?  I
suppose word's crazy equation editor or mathml is another option but it
makes the source itself either less portable or less readable?

I think Knuth talks about literate programming as this ability to
intermingle 'beautified' human-readable representation along with code,
and it seems like Haskell is close to delivering that.  (Tho I think
"literate Haskell" is not the same thing.)

Perhaps a pipe dream tho.


DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is intended only for the addressee named above. As this e-mail may contain confidential or privileged information, if you are not the named addressee, you are not authorised to retain, read, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete the message from your computer.

More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list