[Haskell-cafe] Re: Re: monad subexpressions
sebastian.sylvan at gmail.com
Fri Aug 3 17:11:58 EDT 2007
On 03/08/07, Chris Smith <cdsmith at twu.net> wrote:
> Sebastian Sylvan <sebastian.sylvan at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'd also like to reiterate my request for a notation that doesn't
> > require brackets around the *action* but will also work by applying it
> > to a function which when fully applied to its argument returns an
> > action (i.e.: $foo x y + $bar z w, rather than $(foo x y) + $(bar z
> > w)). Function application is normally very low-noise in Haskell
> > (good), and it would be nice if we can keep it low-noise in this
> > notation too.
> I'm trying to understand your suggestion. Can you tell me how you'd
> sugar the following?
> getA :: Friggle MyA
> getB :: Friggle MyB
> foo :: Int -> MyB -> Friggle MyC
> do a <- getA
> b <- getB a
> foo 42 b
foo 42 (#getB #getA)?
Is there an ambiguity that I'm to dense to see here? :-)
More information about the Haskell-Cafe