Type operators in GHC

[Aleksey Khudyakov]

On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Conal Elliott <conal at conal.net> wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> Yes, I could live with (.->), (.+), etc more easily than `arr`, `plus` etc.
>
> Better yet would be a LANGUAGE pragma I can add to my libraries to get the
> old behavior back.
>
What about treating operators as constructs unless they are mentioned
in the forall?

"~>" is constructor
> foo :: a ~> b

"~>" is variable
> foo :: forall a b (~>). a ~> b