+1 Same opinion as Joachim. --Andreas On 18.01.2016 16:43, Joachim Breitner wrote:
Hi,
Am Montag, den 18.01.2016, 03:17 +0100 schrieb Niklas Hambüchen:
I propose to add to Data.Bool:
-- | Boolean implication. implies :: Bool -> Bool -> Bool implies True x = x implies False _ = True
infix 4 `implies` -- same as (==)
I’m +1 on the grounds that although I know that one of <= or => cuts it, it causes extra mental work to find out which (and annoyance to find out that it is the “wrong” one). Using a name is explicit and gets it right the first time.
-1 on changing the order for Bool, it would just break too much code that relies on that in a fairly obscure way.
+1 for making it right-associative, as implications are usually written.
Undecided about ==>. It would be nice, but the conflict with quickcheck would be annoying. Leaning towards -1.
Greetings, Joachim
-- Andreas Abel <>< Du bist der geliebte Mensch. Department of Computer Science and Engineering Chalmers and Gothenburg University, Sweden andreas.abel@gu.se http://www2.tcs.ifi.lmu.de/~abel/