+1
I'm convinced that this proposed extension would be extremely natural
and practical if we give it a chance. The fact that it may conflict
with previous, less natural syntax choices (lens composition with .
comes to mind) should not be counted against an opt-in extension.
Lens packages could easily provide an alternative notation for their .
for when the extension is enabled.
Regards,
Dominique
2015-11-04 11:44 GMT+01:00 Jeremy
Dot as Postfix Function Apply (https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Records/DeclaredOverloadedRecordFields...) was originally part of ORF, but dropped to keep the scope/discussion more manageable. Now that ORF is in for GHC 8.0, I would like to re-propose dot postfix syntax.
The idea is that instead of
(title person) ++ " " ++ (firstName person) ++ " " ++ (lastName person)
we could have
person.title ++ " " ++ person.firstName ++ " " ++ person.lastName
This is a simple source-to-source translation with no changes to the type system (TDNR is an orthogonal proposal). The advantages are:
1. Code that's easier to read/write. 2. Familiar to users of almost every other programming language. 3. IDE auto-complete - an IDE can suggest functions applicable to the variable after typing .
This would be an opt-in extension.
I'm posting this to the libraries list because that's where proposals generally go, although this isn't strictly a library issue. If it should be on a different list I'll move it.
-- View this message in context: http://haskell.1045720.n5.nabble.com/Proposal-Dot-as-Postfix-Function-Apply-... Sent from the Haskell - Libraries mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries