HASKELL CANT INTO CODE-AS-DATA

(EVAL (SETQ X '(IDENTITY `(EVAL (SETQ X ',X)))))

We're well aware that Lisp is homoiconic.

>>2
Unfortunately, this thread is about Haskell and what unfortunate kind of a language the Haskell is.


(define >>=
  (λ args
    (error "*** Exception: stack overflow")))

>>3
It's actually the perfect language* as it is highly similar to standard mathematical notation

^{*academically}

>>5
>implying that similarity to standard mathematical notation is something everybody wants

It is surprisingly easy to get the right answer with fallacious reasoning or without real understanding. **Traditional mathematical notation contributes to this problem.** Symbols have ambiguous meanings that depend on context, and often even change within a given context. -- Gerald Jay Sussman, Professor of Electrical Engineering at MIT, and creator of Scheme programming language.

Cute, but why not just:
(EVAL (SETQ X '`(EVAL (SETQ X ',X))))
Also, SETQ on an undefined variable has undefined consequences (if X is to be treated as special or not. In real implementation's the symbol-value of that symbol is set(so no lexical meaning), however a few implementations will proclaim X special, which can have unintended, and even harmful consequences for your code(while others won't do such a proclamation). It's best to specify exactly what you are setting instead on relying on undefined behaviour).

The next Haskell will be strict. -- Simon Peyton-Jones, a major contributor to the functional programming language Haskell.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1924061

In the end, any program must manipulate state. A program that has no side effects whatsoever is a kind of black box. All you can tell is that the box gets hotter. -- Simon Peyton-Jones, a major contributor to the functional programming language Haskell.
http://oscon.blip.tv/file/324976

http://book.realworldhaskell.org/read/getting-started.html
>It is sometimes better to leave at least some parentheses in place, even when Haskell allows us to omit them. Complex expressions that rely completely on operator precedence are notorious sources of bugs. A compiler and a human can easily end up with different notions of what even a short, parenthesis-free expression is supposed to do. There is no need to remember all of the precedence and associativity rules numbers: it is simpler to add parentheses if you are unsure.

>>8
>why not just...
To signify the rewriting action.
http://kafee.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/drawing_hands.jpg

Who the fuck is this bitch that keeps pasting quotes everywhere, anyway?

>>11
Some say that knowledge is something that you never have.
Some say that knowledge is something sat in your lap.
Some say that heaven is hell.
Some say that hell is heaven.

In my dome of ivory,
A home of activity,
I want the answers quickly,
But I don't have no energy.

I hold a cup of wisdom,
But there is nothing within.
My cup, she never overfloweth,
And 'tis I that moan- and groaneth.