Re: [Haskell-cafe] Is 'flip' really necessary?

On 26 July 2010 16:33, David Virebayre wrote:

On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 11:53 PM, Edward Z. Yang wrote:

...

An interesting alternate spin on flip is infix notation combined with partial application, such as:

   (`foobar` 3)

which is equivalent to

   \x -> foobar x 3

I frequently use this, although the jury's out on whether or not it's more readable.

I had HLint suggest me this :

before :

listeEtagTot = concatMap (flip listeEtagArm cfgTypesTringle) listeArmOrd

after :

listeEtagTot = concatMap (`listeEtagArm` cfgTypesTringle) listeArmOrd

However, if you had something like this, I think the flip version is nicer: With flip: foo = map (f . flip g x) Without flip: foo = map (f . (`g` x)) -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic Ivan.Miljenovic@gmail.com IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com