infix type operators

[Conal Elliott]

Agreed.  I was surprised by the language inconsistency when I discovered
that symbols were ruled out for type variables.  It just seemed natural
to me when programming with arrows, and I'm surprised it hasn't shown
itself useful before.  - Conal

-----Original Message-----
From: glasgow-haskell-users-bounces at haskell.org
[mailto:glasgow-haskell-users-bounces at haskell.org] On Behalf Of
ross at soi.city.ac.uk
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2005 4:58 PM
To: Remi Turk
Cc: glasgow-haskell-users at haskell.org; Simon Peyton-Jones
Subject: Re: infix type operators

On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 11:59:40PM +0100, Remi Turk wrote:
> - It's one thing more to learn. The difference between types and
>   typevariables (upper/lowercase) is better visible than the
>   difference between operator(variables) and infix-types ("Does
>   it start with a colon?") Which, I have to admit, is more of a
>   vague feeling than anything like a fact.

On the contrary: it's one less exception to remember.  With this change,
the lexical syntax of type variables and type constructors is exactly
the same as that for data variables and data constructors respectively,
except that there are some special type constructors (->), (), (,,),
etc,
just as there are some special data constructors like 1.7, (), (,,) etc.
_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users at haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users