I prefer them to be part of the context-free syntax, since this enables a future extension in which an arbitary expression can be placed between backticks. This would enable one to write things as:
x `f i` y
and
expr1 `expr2` expr3
is to be interpreted as (expr2) (expr1) (expr3),
Doaitse
On Feb 8, 2013, at 13:27 , Simon Marlow
On 08/02/13 11:49, Ben Millwood wrote:
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 12:24:48PM +0000, Simon Marlow wrote:
FWIW, I really dislike whitespace-significant syntax. f ! x should mean the same as f !x. Look at the trouble we have with qualified operators: how many people have tried to write [Monday..] and been surprised that it doesn't work?
What about `elem`? I don't think anyone would argue that ` elem ` makes sense.
Prelude> 1 ` elem ` [1..10] True Prelude> 1 ` {- comment -} elem ` [1..10] True
backticks are part of the context-free syntax, not the lexical syntax (as they should be!). I'm of the opinion that the lexical syntax should be as simple, and as far as possible everything should be pushed into the context-free syntax.
Cheers, Simon
_______________________________________________ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime