> That said, I consider Haskell to be a Lisp language. Then Lisp (aka 'List processor') has lost its meaning. Haskell is at its core a lazy evaluated, statica

> That said, I consider Haskell to be a Lisp language. Then Lisp (aka 'List processor') has lost its meaning. Haskell is at its core a lazy evaluated, statically typed, purely functional programming language. Lisp is none of that. The core of Lisp: an eager evaluated, dynamically typed, programming language supporting imperative, procedural and non-pure functional programming. > But, Haskell was designed from the ground up, from ML, to be as it is. Haskell was designed to have a common lazy language, instead of a dozen languages under development or in use (Miranda, Lazy ML, Clean, ...).