Re: Proposal: Add (&) to Data.Function

From: David Menendez

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Yitzchak Gale wrote:

...

It is a common idiom to write a sequence of composed combinators in reverse order to the way they would be written with ($) or (.). That naturally expresses the idea of the combinators as operations being applied in the given order.

I think the bar should be pretty high before we add a third way to write function application to base. How common is this? Common among whom? Why can't the existing idioms of (.) and ($) work just as well?

I guardedly agree with Dave Menendez. There are a very limited number of convenient 1-character operators available, and I'm not certain that function application should take up 3 of them. On the other hand, this is a common enough idiom to have emerged in both diagrams and lens at least. (I'm not taking a position at this time) John L.