Re: Flipped function application

I'm against this proposal. If we think normal function composition (with the order of the functions "reversed"), is harder to read, then having both flipped and normal functions application is even worse, as you now have to both and switch your mindset every time you come across code that does the opposite of the code you just read. On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 12:31 AM, Erik Hesselink wrote:

On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Andreas Abel wrote:

...

My take is that if a feature is repeatedly asked for (independently), it can't be that bad and should be added...

I strongly oppose this line of reasoning. Every feature has a cost: cognitive (you have to know about it), maintenance, restricting the name space for library authors (and remember that not all Haskell code is on hackage...) etc. Especially with the core language and base, I think the default should be to be conservative.

Also, I don't think these kinds of things should be a majority rule. And especially one where the most vocal have the most votes...

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