That's the "Wearing the Hair Shirt" talk, for those that are familiar. "Purity is more important than, and quite independent of, laziness "The next ML will be

That's the "Wearing the Hair Shirt" talk, for those that are familiar. "Purity is more important than, and quite independent of, laziness "The next ML will be pure, with effects only via monads. The next Haskell will be strict, but still pure. "Still unclear exactly how to add laziness to a strict language. For example, do we want a type distinction between (say) a lazy Int and a strict Int?" From plinkplonk: "It is through insisting on laziness as default and solving some of the problems encountered (via monads for e.g) that he arrived at the position that "the next Haskell will be strict". He also notes some open problems with adding laziness into a statically typed strict language (slide 40 "Still unclear exactly how to add laziness to a strict language. For example, do we want a type distinction between (say) a lazy Int and a strict Int?")."