* Andrew Coppin <andrewcop...@btinternet.com> [2008-12-16 20:23:50 +0000]:
> I think the accusation is more that Haskell tries to be cryptic and
> arcane *on purpose*, just to confuse people.
>
> Sure, there are many concepts in Haskell which just aren't found
> anywhere else. But monads? Catamorphisms? Coroutines? Couldn't we think
> up some less intimidating terminology?
The problem is that "less intimidating" terminology generally seems to
mean inaccurate or misleading terminology. They aren't concepts that
aren't found anywhere else, they're concepts that *are* found elsewhere
(category theory, among other places), that's why they have those names.
(Also, "coroutines"? Seriously? That's hardly an obscure term in
programming circles.)
> {-# LANGUAGE ExistentialQuantification #-}
>
> Hmm, now if this was Perl or something, that would be
> HiddenTypeVariables or something. Much less fearsom-sounding.
Also much less informative, and less accurate. The fact that Haskell
embraces its mathematical basis instead of trying to completely
obfuscate it away is not a bad thing, in my opinion.
> But then, I guess that's what you get for a lanuage designed by a
> committee of university professors. ;-)
>
> At any rate, if we're to have a logo, let's not have one which actively
> *promotes* the notion that Haskell is complex and difficult and that
> only theoretical physicists need apply...
I think you're reading way too much into a logo.
--
mithrandi, i Ainil en-Balandor, a faer Ambar
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
