John Meacham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> For instance, function composition could use the degree sign: °
>> and leave the . for module qualification.
> why not the actual functional composition operator: · or ?
Because: a) I've always used a small circle, the centered dot is for
(dot) products. I guess this is just a matter of mathematical
dialects. And
b) I didn't find it :-)
(B> we could also make good use of $B"O(B $B"P(B $B"M(B $B"+(B $B"J(B $B"K(B
(B> and all the other fun
(B> mathematical operators.
(B
(BCool! However, I think most/some current tools use ISO-8859(-1 or
(Bwhatever) input, and for legacy reasons it may be a good idea to stick
(Bto symbols in that (those) subset(s).
(B
(BAs you may have noticed, I suggested mostly these symbols for
(Bthe language extensions, keeping H98 in 7 bits may or may not be a
(Bpriority. At any rate, extensions could probably more easily
(Bdisregrard legacy.
(B
(B> I would love to be able to use unicode to make my programs more
(B> readable. just as an alternate syntax for awkward ascii constructs.
(B> and as operator, function names when they make sense.
(B
(BAnother thing; it should be possible to have (X)Emacs use display the
(Bglyphs you mention ($B"O(B $B"P(B $B"M(B $B"+(B $B"J(B $B"K(B) instead of
(Bthe underlying
(Bmultigraphs.
(B
(B> this could probably be done with a preprocessor, but wolud be easier in
(B> the compiler to work out the layout rule and handle language extensions
(B> and whatnot.
(B
(BLayout may be a problem. Not for type signatures, though.
(B
(B-kzm
(B--
(BIf I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
