[Haskell-cafe] (no subject)

Flavio Villanustre fvillanustre at gmail.com
Mon Jun 10 14:22:37 CEST 2013


while I don't disagree regarding the clean and consistent syntax of
Haskell, do you realize that some people would argue that camels are horses
designed by committee too? :)

While designing by committee guarantees agreement across a large number of
people, it does not always ensure efficiency, as committees may lead to
poor compromises, sometimes.

However, Haskell may be an example of a good case of design-by-committee
computer language.


Flavio Villanustre

On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:11 AM, Zed Becker <zed.becker at gmail.com> wrote:

>  Hi all,
>  Haskell, is arguably the best example of a design-by-committee language.
> The syntax is clean and most importantly, consistent. The essence of a
> purely functional programming is maintained, without disturbing its real
> world capacity.
>  To all the people who revise the Haskell standard, and implement the
> language,
>    1.
>          Promise to me, and the rest of the community, that you will keep
>          up the good effort :)
>          2.
>          Promise to me, and the rest of the community, that Haskell will
>          always spiritually remain the same clean, consistent programming language
>          as it is now!
>  Regards,
> Zed Becker
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130610/b7a4d15d/attachment.htm>

More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list