#14812: Dot-Notation for Flipped Function Application -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: tepan | Owner: (none) Type: feature request | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 8.2.2 Resolution: | Keywords: Operating System: Unknown/Multiple | Architecture: | Unknown/Multiple Type of failure: None/Unknown | Test Case: Blocked By: | Blocking: Related Tickets: | Differential Rev(s): Wiki Page: | -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Comment (by tepan): Replying to [comment:8 svenpanne]: I cannot argue with historical consensus and what is and isn't a "very, very good reason"/"warts in language design". So, if it's going to be "let's not do this", then "meh" it is. Concerning breaking old code, a language pragma `{-# LANGUAGE FlippedFunctionApplicationDot #-}` might provide the necessary backward- compatibility. But, so far, I haven't seen Haskell code with the dot-operator without white-spaces. It seems to be consensus (or at least advisable) to use the dot-operator with whitespaces, and to leave `.` without whitespaces only for module access. Thanks for the links, though. Maybe they will help me understand why, on a "lexical level" `Foo.bar` would cease to be unambiguously parsed as "`bar` of module `Foo`" once `foo.bar` would be parsed as "`bar` applied to `foo`". -- Ticket URL: http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/14812#comment:9 GHC http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ The Glasgow Haskell Compiler