It took me a while to adjust to `(>~) ` too, despite its simplicity, I guess because it was buried among all the other operators which seemed like they could only be learned all at once. I wonder if a good expression could be found, after the fashion of `for`?
One that occurred to me was `subst` or, more hideously, `substAwait`. (Of course `subst` could be the name of just about any operator in `pipes`) One could then explain it in the haddocks as meaning something like `s/await/mypipe/g`. Or maybe `replace`? The trouble is to make it salient that it's `await` that's being replaced. your Michael -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Haskell Pipes" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
