andrewcoppin at btinternet.com
Tue Jun 19 16:23:09 EDT 2007
Jens Fisseler wrote:
> The equivalent of Haskell's list data type would be the array type of most
> imperative or object-oriented languages. Both are some sort of basic
> collection type, good for their own sake, but if you want more
> specialized collection types, you have to implement them.
Maybe it's just a culture thing then... In your typical OOP language,
you spend five minutes thinking "now, what collection type shall I use
here?" before going on to actually write the code. In Haskell, you just
go "OK, so I'll put a list here..."
More information about the Haskell-Cafe