On Wed, 2008-08-06 at 22:50 -0700, Jason Dusek wrote: > Jonathan Cast <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Jason Dusek wrote: > > > It is an arrow that takes a C to an arrow that takes an A > > > and makes the product C x A. I want to write curry(C x A) > > > but that is ridiculous looking. What's the right notation > > > for this thing? > > > > It's a curried pairing operator. Haskell calls it (,); it > > might also be called pair. It is also, of course, equal to > > curry(id), so if you write identity arrows as the > > corresponding objects then curry(C x A) is perfectly > > reasonable. > > Why is it equal to curry(id)?
curry f x y = f (x, y) So therefore curry id x y = id (x, y) = (x, y) Eta-contracting, we get curry id = \ x. \ y. (x, y) which is your function. jcc _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
