[Haskell-cafe] Re: Improved documentation for Bool

[Richard O'Keefe]

On 20 Jan 2009, at 8:33 am, Andrew Coppin wrote:

> roconnor at theorem.ca wrote:
>> I noticed the Bool datatype isn't well documented.  Since Bool is  
>> not a common English word, I figured it could use some haddock to  
>> help clarify it for newcomers.
>
> My only problem with it is that it's called Bool, while every other  
> programming language on Earth calls it Boolean.

> (Or at least, the languages that *have* a name for it...)

Algol 68, C99, C++, C#, Standard ML, OCAML, F#, Clean

all use 'bool', not 'Boolean'.  Of course if you want to go
for historical priority, that'd be Fortran's LOGICAL type...