[Haskell-cafe] Proposal: New syntax for Haskell

[Albert Y. C. Lai]

A specification language is desirable. (Test cases are special cases of 
specifications. Test-driven development is a revival of the waterfall 
process.) For specifying interactions (computer-computer or 
computer-human), I recommend "live sequence charts" of David Harel, or 
generally any one based on temporal logics.

The problems with natural languages or sublanguages for anything from 
specification to implementation are:

0. You have to transit to formal languages at some point (the 
implementation is formal). The later you transit, the later you can use 
a computer to analyze and/or simulate for catching mistakes. You catch 
fewer mistakes, and later.

1. To re-gain the benefit of formality above, some people settle for 
restrictive sublanguages. Thus naturalness is lost anyway. The problems 
below, however, are still preserved.

2. Natural languages and sublanguages lack diagrams. For some 
specifications, formal diagrammatic languages are more suitable (e.g., 
live sequence charts).

3. Natural languages and sublanguages lack scoping and parenthesizing 
such as in mathematical notation and formal languages:

   sqrt (sin (x^2 + y) - 2) * z

   (forall r. (Int -> M r) -> M r) -> M Int

   forall r. ((Int -> M r) -> M r) -> M Int