Re: Moving basic functions

* Herbert Valerio Riedel [2013-04-03 12:31:06+0200]

Roman Cheplyaka writes:

[...]

...

I'd +1 for Henning's forcePair if a better name is found (the word force is normally associated with being strict, although I can see why he used it here).

btw, just thinking out loud, what about an infix operator such as (just as an example):

(!.!) :: a -> b -> (a,b) a !.! b = a `seq` b `seq` (a,b)

which let's you write a pair as

( exp1 !.! exp2 )

which has a bit of a resemblance to the standard tuple-construction syntax:

( exp1 , exp2 )

?

Did you just fall victim of forcePair's name? :) It's about a different issue. Or is this meant as an unrelated proposal? Roman