Re: Proposal: Add (&) to Data.Function

My major point was originally that code written with & 'reads' well if the person reads the operator as 'and' or 'and then', but with '|>' you have to mix metaphors involving pipes that don't quite exactly hold and further exacerbate the common complaint that Haskell has a ton of complex multicharacter operators that nobody knows how to pronounce. On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Johan Tibell wrote:

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 10:46 AM, John Wiegley wrote:

...

Yes, a strong positive in favor of & of |> is that it allows the lens library to offer the highly useful variants &= and &~, which have obvious (and related) meanings to someone using lens. |>= and |>~ would get a bit awkward in comparison.

I don't think embedding APL in Haskell should be a guiding principle. ;)

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