Composition operator [was: Re: Records in Haskell]

[Donn Cave]

Quoth Brandon Allbery <allbery.b at gmail.com>,
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 17:14, Donn Cave <donn at avvanta.com> wrote:
>
>> "Spaces or unicode" would be the worst idea yet, but hopefully that
>> isn't what you meant.
>
>
> Thing is, I think the spaces idea is considered acceptable because it's
> *already there*.  Take a look at how GHC decides whether (.) is the
> composition operator or a module qualification.

Sure, but I mean:  given that "f . g" continues to be composition,
but a record notation takes over the unspaced dot, breaking an
existing "f.g" ...

... what is the rationale for an additional unicode dot?

That's why I more or less assume that wasn't what he meant, that
both " . " and "<unicode dot>" would be supported at the same time
for composition, but rather just that one or the other would be
chosen.

	Donn