One issue with this proposal is it makes it *completely* impossible to pick
a type constructor operator that works with both older GHCs and 7.6.
It is a fairly elegant choice, but in practice it would force me and many
others to stop using them completely for the next couple of years, as I
wouldn'
+1. Making ":" the signal for type variables would break even more code, f.e.
fclabels.
"~" almost means "variable", so I'd like that as a prefix.
Sjoerd
On Sep 15, 2012, at 2:09 AM, Cale Gibbard wrote:
> There's a fair amount of code out there which uses (~>) as a type
> variable (we have ~1
