ANNOUNCE: Draft TOC of Haskell in a Nutshell

Bill Halchin
Tue, 09 Jan 2001 03:15:34

Yes! I agree with Manuel about the IO. It looks bad being towards
the end.


Bill Halchin

>From: "Manuel M. T. Chakravarty" <>
>Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: Draft TOC of Haskell in a Nutshell
>Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 13:43:59 +1100
>Brook Conner <> wrote,
> > You can find it in PDF form at
> > (it should have the fonts
> > embedded - OReilly uses a couple of oddballs) and in ASCII text at
> >
>Makes sense to me.  However, I would move IO further to the
>front.  For any "real life" programming, IO is essential
>and, I think, it is bad for the image of Haskell to treat it
>as something dirty that is relegated to end of every (at
>least, many) introduction of Haskell.
>I have just given an Introduction to Computing course using
>Haskell and written a set of lecture notes, which introduce
>a couple of concepts (including IO) differently than
>commonly done.  The whole stuff is at
>Feel free to get inspiration from the material (except Weeks
>8 - 10, which weren't given by me).  You will find IO in
>Week 5.  Note that I haven't used the word monad a single
>time.  IMHO, monads are an advanced concept, IO is not.
>It's like you can introduce recursion without discussing
>stacks.  If you understand stacks, you can gain a deeper
>understanding of recursion, but if you hear about recursion
>for the first time, the mention of stacks will only distract
>the average student.
> > The middle part is a bit different - a short "cookbook" of
> > semi-practical programs addressing fairly common programming tasks -
> > some of the kinds of things you'd typically do with Perl or C++. I think
> > it needs more "recipes" of course, but I'd like to know if the general
> > idea is working.
>I think, that this is a good idea.
>Haskell mailing list

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at