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 <wren@freegeek.org> wrote:
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