Yes, both `flip (.)` and `flip ($)` make sense. As a lens user with quite abit of existing code, keeping & as-is and adding # is appealing.


On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 12:55 AM, Wvv <vitea3v@rambler.ru> wrote:
In my calculus, 13 in favor, 5 against, 2 not against, 5 don't care or
neutral.

I think that this thread is still important.

Hayoo! can't parse "a -> (a -> b) -> b" (bug ?) and if we try to find (&)
from Lens, this function has no signature at  Hayoo! :)
Maybe Hayoo! don't like flipped function application as well. :))
So, I can't say how many packages already have flipped function application.

But I know, that at least one package is already added flipped function
application and this package is popular!

Yes, I'm saying abut Edward's "lens" library. As I understand, Edward choose
the name looking which name was favorite in a discussion a year ago.  An
this is good.

(&) it will be de-facto a name for flipped function application if this
thread dead.



PROPOSAL: /Data.Function.Flipped/ package


So, maybe "if you can't resist the process, lead it". I mean we still could
choose the name.

Who is in favor - we can lead the process not adding function into the base
Who is against  - you can lead the process with find only one name for
flipped function application

*This solution satisfy everyone*:
1) Who is against - we don't add (#) into Data.Function and into the base
2) Who is in favor - we add flipped function application in a package and
reserve module name and function name

We all could choose the name and make a little package not in base:
Data.Function.Flipped
and add here this 1 function or may be 2 (as Andreas Abel suggested).

For example, I prefer
(#) = flip ($)
and
(&) = flip (.)

This case:

   g . f $ x == x # f & g


Are you agree?



Erik Hesselink wrote
> On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Wvv &lt;

> vitea3v@

> &gt; wrote:
>> 2.1) Some people are against this function at all
>> 2.2) Some people do not want to have this function, but not categorically
>> 2.3) Few(?) people doesn't care
>> 2.4) Many people wish to add flipped function application
>
> I think this phrasing is too loaded given the actual numbers. I've
> counted in this thread, being generous with the +1s (bikeshedding the
> name counts as an implicit +1) and I find 11 in favor, 7 against and 6
> unknown/don't care.
>
> Erik
> _______________________________________________
> Libraries mailing list

> Libraries@

> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries





--
View this message in context: http://haskell.1045720.n5.nabble.com/Flipped-function-application-tp5738131p5738402.html
Sent from the Haskell - Libraries mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries