+1, it's no worse than module syntax, and it's opt-in.
I suppose my vote bumps it up from -1000 to -999. /shrug
Dot as postfix function application is frankly a great idea that exists in
many many languages. It's great for intellisense and it's often great for
reading code left to right. It may not be the best fit for Haskell, but
Haskell has never been one of those "one right way to code" sort of
languages.
On Wednesday, November 4, 2015, 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