[ghc-steering-committee] Proposal #173: The dot type operator, rec: accept

[Iavor Diatchki]

Seems reasonable to me too.

On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 7:52 PM Richard Eisenberg <rae at cs.brynmawr.edu>
wrote:

> I'm in support as well.
>
> Richard
>
> > On Oct 9, 2018, at 4:45 PM, Eric Seidel <eric at seidel.io> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > This proposal would extend the parser to allow the '.' character to
> appear in type operators, allowing one to write code like the following:
> >
> > ```
> > type (f . g) x = f (g x)
> >
> > foo :: (Maybe . Either Int) Bool
> > foo = Just (Right True)
> > ```
> >
> > I recommend we accept the proposal, as it would resolve an odd
> inconsistency between the term and type languages. The main downside seems
> to be that combining a type-level '.' with a 'forall' is a bit hard to
> read, but I think the benefits of a more consistent syntax outweigh this
> concern.
> >
> > Eric
> > _______________________________________________
> > ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> > ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> > https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
>
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/attachments/20181012/2565194b/attachment.html>