<div dir="ltr">On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Nikita Volkov <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:nikita.y.volkov@gmail.com" target="_blank">nikita.y.volkov@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">
On Jun 23, 2013, at 10:11 PM, Henning Thielemann <<a href="mailto:lemming@henning-thielemann.de">lemming@henning-thielemann.de</a>> wrote:<br>
> If in future Prelude moves more and more to one most general function that does everything given the right type, then I am really concerning to use NoImplicitPrelude in all my modules and use a custom Prelude or none at all.<br>
<br>
</div>That's exactly what I am doing now and the very existence of a dozen of "prelude" projects on hackage suggests that I'm hardly alone in that.</blockquote><div><br></div><div style>Except that most of them are making things *more* general, whereas Henning believes polymorphism is evil and confusing.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>Is there anything else we need to remove from Haskell to make it "appropriate"? Within the past 24 hours I have heard impassioned arguments for jettisoning polymorphism, monads, and arrows. Maybe strong typing should be removed next? Currying?</div>
</div><div><br></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr"><div>brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates</div><div><a href="mailto:allbery.b@gmail.com" target="_blank">allbery.b@gmail.com</a> <a href="mailto:ballbery@sinenomine.net" target="_blank">ballbery@sinenomine.net</a></div>
<div>unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad <a href="http://sinenomine.net" target="_blank">http://sinenomine.net</a></div></div>
</div></div>