<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18852"></HEAD>
<BODY style="PADDING-LEFT: 10px; PADDING-RIGHT: 10px; PADDING-TOP: 15px"
id=MailContainerBody leftMargin=0 topMargin=0 CanvasTabStop="true"
name="Compose message area">
<DIV><FONT size=4 face="LM Mono 12">This may be the last in the series given
that Simon Marlow feels that I am being non-sequitur. I on the other hand feel
that I am being very much on topic. To quote Dune, "They move in mysterious
ways." I wanted to complete a thought and I thought to end it on number
7.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4 face="LM Mono 12"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4 face="LM Mono 12">My guess is why the case-of construct is
preferred is due to Haskell being a functional language. In other words the
world is to be wrapped up into a ball and passed like a basketball. The
if-then-else paradigm holds a world view where the world consists of disparate
parts to be accessed and tested, however. This supports my thesis. It may be
worth considering the removal of if-then-else as opposed to fixing
it.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4 face="LM Mono 12"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4 face="LM Mono 12">Simon Marlow wrote "<A
title="mailto:haskell-prime@haskell.org CTRL + Click to follow link"
href="mailto:haskell-prime@haskell.org">haskell-prime@haskell.org</A> is
specifically for discussing proposals for changes in future revisions of the
Haskell language." I have an anti-proposal. Do not change anything unless you
know what you are doing. Don't make a proposal unless you know what you are
saying.</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>