I hope it does sneak into Prelude, if at all. Having to import a module just for (#) is already going to make it rarely used, but allowing name clashes (since most library authors only care about compatibility with Prelude) would make the matters even worse. <carter.schonwald@gmail.com> wrote:
as long as the operator doesn't sneak into prelude (and thus consuming namespace for everyone), i don't really care >what its called (or if we get it.)
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 1:23 PM, Simon Peyton-Jones <simonpj@microsoft.com> wrote:
I quite like that. ($$), that is. Better than (&)
Simon
| -----Original Message-----
| From: Libraries [mailto:libraries-bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of
| Twan van Laarhoven
| Sent: 10 October 2013 18:20
| To: libraries@haskell.org
| Subject: Re: Flipped function application
|
| On 10/10/13 16:16, David Menendez wrote:
| > we don't need new name suggestions at this point, but:
| >
| > Consider <**> :: f a -> f (a -> b) -> f b.
| >
| > That suggests <$$> :: f a -> (a -> b) -> f b by analogy, so maybe $$
| :: a -> (a
| > -> b) -> b? This avoids the downsides of & while maybe being less
| ugly to
| > combine with things than |>. Also, it looks like $, suggesting
| they're related.
| >
|
| As a data point: I have in fact used <$$> as (flip fmap) before, with
| this exact
| reasoning.
|
|
|
| Twan