On Tue, 7 Jul 2009, hask...@henning-thielemann.de wrote:
I like to note that I'm against this proposal. The example given in
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/wiki/QualifiedOperators
namely [Red..] can be easily resolved by adding a space, thus [Red ..]. I
use qualified operators occasionally, since I use NumericPrelude and thus
have to import some things from Prelude in a qualified way. As there will
appear more and more infix operators in libraries along with more name
clashes (e.g. recently discussed List.++ and Monoid.++), qualified operator
names will become not so uncommon. Of course, to keep the spirit of infix
operators, you will better define custom operators locally, but this is only
reasonable if you use an infix operator more than once.
The current syntax is also in a way consistent, since e.g. (+) coincides
with a two side operator section, which is no longer true with the new
proposal.
Should the consistency with operator section also be added as 'cons' to
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/wiki/QualifiedOperators
?
Also (...) and `...` are dual, which is a nice property.
_______________________________________________
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
