[Haskell-cafe] commending "Design concepts in programming languages"

Max Rabkin max.rabkin at gmail.com
Tue May 12 14:04:06 EDT 2009

On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Wolfgang Jeltsch
<g9ks157k at acme.softbase.org> wrote:
> At least, I cannot
> remember seeing the other notation (first morphism on the left) in category
> theory literature so far. It’s just that my above-mentioned professor told me
> that category theorists would use the first-morphism-on-the-left notation.

I've seen the notation f;g for g.f somewhere (and Wikipedia mentions
it). I think it's less ambiguous than just fg (which I've seen for f.g
too), but in Haskell we have the option of >>>. A flipped application
might be nice to go with it. How about >$> ?


More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list