[Haskell-cafe] re-definition of '.'

Max Eronin reductor at gmail.com
Tue Nov 22 20:47:54 EST 2005

> is the word OOP persuade so strange on you?

No, my brain exploded by the examples and proposed rules made me look so....
When it is exploding I often start acting funnily. And I was fortunate
enough not to begin biting the dogs and scratching the cats after an
attempt to predict an order of application with two different (but not
so) operators that bubble arguments left to right and then throw them
backward and over again.
Something like "PLEASE READ OUT" statement in INTERCAL.

There was nothing about OOP in my posting (as well as in yours).

> see any critics from you or any other FP purists

Not sure I see what you mean by 'FP purists' in the context of Haskell language
But whatever -, Haskell is still a pure language, isn't it?
Looks like now it's time to change this inadvertence. Let it be
impure, vulgar, dirty and scripting!

And you are absolutely right. I missed the key of your idea. My brain
is erupted, you know... :(


More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list