At this time I haven't switched the %~ operators from %. I will miss the consistency that operator= or operator~ applies the operator to the target of the lens, like how += applies (+) to the target of an l-value, in this case, but i think it'd be silly to try too hard to be consistent across every use of % in lens and that %= for mod-equals still reads better than &=, which _is_ used in lens for bitwise .&. in data.bits.lens mosty because .&.= is silly looking ;)

-Edward

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 1:46 PM, John Wiegley <johnw@fpcomplete.com> wrote:
>>>>> Edward Kmett <ekmett@gmail.com> writes:

> We had switched to % from (|>) to be consistent with the other (+=) (*=)
> operators where (%=) was being read as 'mod-equals' as a bit of a pun, and
> could be seen as the application of the % operator to the target. 

Yes, a strong positive in favor of & of |> is that it allows the lens library
to offer the highly useful variants &= and &~, which have obvious (and
related) meanings to someone using lens.  |>= and |>~ would get a bit awkward
in comparison.

--
John Wiegley
FP Complete                         Haskell tools, training and consulting
http://fpcomplete.com               johnw on #haskell/irc.freenode.net

_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries