Proposal: ArgumentDo

[Aloïs Cochard]

-1 for same reasons.

On 8 July 2016 at 14:00, Henrik Nilsson <Henrik.Nilsson at nottingham.ac.uk>
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Joachim Breitner wrote:
>
> > Am Freitag, den 08.07.2016, 13:09 +0200 schrieb Sven Panne:
> > > I don't think so: https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc
> > /wiki/ArgumentDo#Bl
> > [...]
> > Where is the outer set of parenthesis coming from?
> >
> > This is all not related to the ArgumentDo notation. Note that [...]
>
> The very fact that that experts can't easily agree on how a small
> Haskell fragment is parsed to me just confirms that Haskell already
> is a syntactically very cumbersome language.
>
> The present proposal just makes matters worse. For that reason
> alone, I don't find it compelling at all. (So -1 from me, then.)
>
> I will not repeat the many other strong arguments against that has been
> made. But I must say I don't find the use cases as documented
> on the associated web page compelling at all. Maybe there is a tacit
> desire to be able to pretend functions are keywords for various
> creative uses in supporting EDSLs and such. But for that to be truly
> useful, one need to support groups of related keywords. Something
> like Agda's mixfix syntax springs to mind. But this proposal does
> not come close, so the benefits are minimal and the drawbacks large.
>
> As a final point, the inherent asymmetry of the proposal (the
> last argument position is special as, for certain kinds of
> expressions, parentheses may be omitted there but not elsewhere)
> is also deeply unsettling.
>
> Best,
>
> /Henrik
>
> --
> Henrik Nilsson
> School of Computer Science
> The University of Nottingham
> nhn at cs.nott.ac.uk
>
>
>
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
> message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
> University of Nottingham.
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
> permitted by UK legislation.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
> Glasgow-haskell-users at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
>



-- 
*Λ\oïs*
http://twitter.com/aloiscochard
http://github.com/aloiscochard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-users/attachments/20160708/f97cf4b3/attachment-0001.html>