Speaking of MagicHash, is it really necessary to take an operator with
"potential" like (#) just to keep primitive symbols separate from the rest?
At least from my 2010 Haskell learner perspective, it seems odd to create a
whole language extension/lexical change just for that purpose.
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 10:20 PM, wren ng thornton
On 10/28/10 10:42 AM, Ben Millwood wrote:
Here's the wiki page: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/wiki/CompositionAsDot
Personally I think function composition is what Haskell is all about and it is absolutely essential that the syntax for it be lightweight. If we think using . as qualification as well as composition is confusing, I'm much more inclined to say using it as qualification was a mistake.
The comment on the wiki page about $ being more common in reality is not even close to true for my own code, and I don't think I'm unusual in that regard.
Agreed on both counts. Personally, I'd much rather have name qualification and record selection use a different character than to remove (.) as composition. And replacing (.) with some abomination like `o` is unthinkable.
As for the selector character, I'm partial to # but that would clash with MagicHash.
-- Live well, ~wren
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe