I'm very on the fence on this topic, but one point i haven't seen mentioned is the influence of syntax highlighting on this. My guess is that I would like this extension when I have syntax highlighting available and would dislike it when I do not.

Also, I agree with Carter about the record update syntax - I find it harder to parse visually than most other parts of the language, and I expect I'd find curly brace syntax for inline 'do' harder to parse in a similar way. On the other hand, maybe I should get used to both...

On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Joachim Breitner <mail@joachim-breitner.de> wrote:

Hi,

Am Donnerstag, den 07.07.2016, 13:15 -0400 schrieb Carter Schonwald:
> agreed -1,
> ambiguity is bad for humans, not just parsers.
>
> perhaps most damningly,
> > f do{ x } do { y }
>
> is just reallly really weird/confusing to me,

It is weird to me, but in no way confusing under the simple new rules,
and I am actually looking forward to using that, and also to reading
code with that.

In fact, everything I wanted to pass two arguments in do-notation to a
function I felt at a loss. The prospect of itemizing multiple large
arguments to a function by writing

someFunctionWithManyArguments
do firstArgument
do second Argument which may span
several lines
do third Argument

is actually making me happy! It feels like going from XML to YAML...

Greetings,
Joachim

--

Joachim “nomeata” Breitner
mail@joachim-breitner.de • https://www.joachim-breitner.de/
XMPP: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de • OpenPGP-Key: 0xF0FBF51F
Debian Developer: nomeata@debian.org
_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users