Re: [Haskell-cafe] Monoid wants a (++) equivalent

Ok. When nobody can agree on a graphical operator can it be shortened to "mop" and "munit"? (Personally I'm for (++). (Yeah, I know.)) -ljr Daniel Peebles wrote:

But we don't want to imply it's commutative either. Having something "bidirectional" like <> or <+> feels more commutative than associative to me.

On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 6:39 PM, John Meacham wrote:

...

...

On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 09:45:45AM -0700, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:

...

I've thought for a while that it would be very nice indeed if the Monoid class had a more concise operator for infix appending than "a `mappend` b". I wonder if other people are of a similar opinion, and if so, whether this is worth submitting a libraries@ proposal over. +1.

IIRC Jules Bean has proposed using (+>) for this purpose, which I like. Â It has the advantages of (a) not clashing with any other (common) operators, (b) making more obvious the fact that mappend is not necessarily commutative, and (c) providing the obvious (<+) for 'flip mappend' which is sometimes useful. (+>) seems to imply to me that the operator is non-associative. Something

On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 02:54:38PM -0400, Brent Yorgey wrote: like (<>) or (<+>) would be better.

    John

-- John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈ - http://notanumber.net/ _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe