Edward Kmett wrote:
I'm pretty strongly -1 on adding (?)... we already have established combinators... more inessential complexity to newcomers to the language.
I'm not so worried about that if it's not in the Prelude. I doubt that this would get wide usage. And if it does, then maybe that is better use of the namespace real estate. I am 0 on (?). I probably would never use it. I am -1 on ifThenElse. We already have bool. Some of our developers use it all the time and it's fine. It's not like "map" and "for" which have common idioms where parameter order really matters. Other than that, we shouldn't litter the libraries with flipped versions of everything. Anyway, bool is the natural parameter order in Haskell. I'll make more explicit what others have already said, with this analogy: maybe (if it fails) (if it succeeds) (input data) either (if it fails) (if it succeeds) (input data) foldl (if it's null) (if it's not null) (input data) foldr (if it's null) (if it's not null) (input data) Whereas Haskell's if-then-else syntax is awkward. Some people (not me) even say it should never be used at all. And so bool (if it fails) (if it succeeds) (input data) makes the most sense. -Yitz