nemesis wrote:
> good ol' abstract data types.

That's not an abstract data type. It's merely a hidden implementation.

>  I still enjoy Haskell's powerful algebraic
> datatypes, higher-order functions, currying and concise coding a lot more.

*That* is way closer to an abstract data type. :-)  And yah, I'm not 
condoning it as better. Merely as possible.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     Remember the good old days, when we
     used to complain about cryptography
     being export-restricted?

Post a reply to this message