ajb@spamcop.net wrote:
I suggested:
f . g $ h x
or f $ g $ h x
[..]
The second is just plain wrong. My reasoning is here for those who care:
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.haskell.cafe/11256
If you want a left-associative operator, you're free to define it (though single ascii symbols are rare). In a more realistic example, the current dollars help to improve readability, I think, and that is my argument why "$" should be right- associative: map (+ 1) $ filter (/= 0) $ Set.toList l An additional $ before the final argument (" $ l") looks stupid to me. I also find additional parentheses instead of the dollars more confusing, because of the other parts in parentheses. For a function definition, I recommend to simply change the dollars into dots and omit the last argument (if that is possible): myfun = map (+ 1) . filter (/= 0) . Set.toList That should correspond to your taste as well, although someone (ie. S.M.) proposed to disallow the dot as operator in haskell'. So, I don't know if either "." or "$" may be changed in the future and what other symbols may be used instead of these user-definable functions. However, if the argument cannot be omitted, I suggest to only change the last dot back into a dollar: myfun l = map (+ sum l) . filter (/= 0) $ Set.toList l I've no solution (ie. operator) for omitting two elements in: f x y = g $ h $ i x y apart from omitting only the first: f x = g . h . i x HTH Christian