On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 6:21 PM, Niklas Broberg
I'm very suspicious about the power/weight ratio of this change. Normally, for simple value-level stuff like this, provide both options:
mapM / forM. =<< >>=
So how about, rather than break things, just provide an alternative to ($).
Alright, I'm not sure what the proper channel for doing this is, but I reckon here is as good as anywhere. I would like to propose that the Haskell' Prelude includes the function
f $$ x = f x
with the same fixity level as $ (presumably 0) but being left associative instead. And that $ is left as is.
It's a pity that @ isn't available for use as an operator. I've seen
it used to represent application in a few places, and its resemblance
to an "a" is a handy mnemonic. Is & still free?
--
Dave Menendez