I'd presume we'd keep the current fixity. It plays much nicer when mixed
with >>= and the like, and it doesn't mix with the <$> <*> crowd despite
appearances anyways even if you give it the "obvious" fixity.
-Edward
On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 4:53 AM, lennart spitzner wrote: infixl 1
I assume? (lens and some other libs agree on this fixity already.) (also, +1) On 21/08/16 19:23, David Feuer wrote: The <&> operator is rather popular: (<&>) :: Functor f => f a -> (a -> b) -> f b
(<&>) = flip fmap Now that we have (&) in Data.Function, I think we should have (<&>) in
Data.Functor. _______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries _______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries