`seq` would be an issue too. On Thu, Sep 3, 2020, 3:11 PM Henning Thielemann < lemming@henning-thielemann.de> wrote:
On Thu, 3 Sep 2020, Tikhon Jelvis wrote:
In the proposals for relative precedences that I've heard before, it would be a syntactic error to use two operators that *don't* have explicitly defined relationships without parentheses. + and * would work together the way you would expect from math, but you simply wouldn't be able to mix them with ++ without parentheses. Seems like this would avoid spooky action at a distance since operators that aren't clearly related simply don't have relative precedences at all.
right
Not sure how to handle operators like $ in a system like that though.
($) in GHC is already an exception because it works with forall-quantified operands, too. _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries