[Haskell-cafe] If you'd design a Haskell-like language, what would you do different?

[Matthew Farkas-Dyck]

With GHC 7.0.3:

$ cat test.hs
class ℝ a where {
  test :: a;
};

(∈) :: Eq a => a -> [a] -> Bool;
x ∈ (y:ys) = x == y || x ∈ ys;

main = putStrLn "Two of three ain't bad (^_~)";
$ runhaskell test.hs
Two of three ain't bad (^_~)
$

On 20/12/2011, David Fox <ddssff at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Robert Clausecker <fuzxxl at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Image you would create your own language with a paradigm similar to
>> Haskell or have to chance to change Haskell without the need to keep any
>> compatibility. What stuff would you add to your language, what stuff
>> would you remove and what problems would you solve completely different?
>>
>> Thanks in advance for all answers, yours
>>
>
> One thing that concerns me is the use of capital letters to distinguish
> type and class names and constructors from values.  If I was doing it over
> I would use a typographical distinction like italics for types, bold for
> classes.  That way we could have a constructor named ∅, a function named ∈,
> a class named ℝ.
>


Cheers,
Matthew Farkas-Dyck