Composition operator [was: Re: Records in Haskell]

Morten Brodersen Morten.Brodersen at
Fri Jan 13 04:32:25 CET 2012

Requiring unicode characters for the Haskell syntax to solve a 
*relatively* simple problem is a bad bad idea.

It is the equivalent of shooting birds with nuclear missiles. Yes you do 
solve the "bird" problem but it is nothing compared with the fallout 


On 13/01/12 10:15, Donn Cave wrote:
>> Quoth Brandon Allbery<allbery.b at>,
> ...
>> Seems obvious to me:  on the one hand, there should be a plain-ASCII
>> version of any Unicode symbol; on the other, the ASCII version has
>> shortcomings the Unicode one doesn't (namely the existing conflict between
>> use as composition and use as module and now record qualifier).  So, the
>> Unicode one requires support but avoids weird parse issues.
> OK.  To me, the first hand is all you need - if there should be a
> plain-ASCII version of any Unicode symbol anyway, then you can avoid
> some trouble by just recognizing that you don't need Unicode symbols
> (let alone with different parsing rules.)
> 	Donn
> _______________________________________________
> Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
> Glasgow-haskell-users at

More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list