[Haskell-cafe] Applicative do?
jfredett at gmail.com
Fri Oct 9 13:45:12 EDT 2009
The only issue I would have with such a notation is not being able to
visually tell the difference between a monadic function (say, without
a explicit type sig, which is how I write parsers), and an applicative
I'd prefer something like
foo = app
If only for some visual distinction, I think it also resolves the "do
knowing about types" issue.
Plus, this is a good case for some kind of custom-do syntax facility.
So we could make do syntax for everything. :)
On Oct 9, 2009, at 1:11 PM, Robert Atkey wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-10-09 at 18:06 +0100, Philippa Cowderoy wrote:
>> This leads us to the bikeshed topic: what's the concrete syntax?
> I implemented a simple Camlp4 syntax extension for Ocaml to do this. I
> chose the syntax:
> let x = foo
> let y = bar
> in <pure stuff>
> I quite like the word "applicatively".
> Your overloading suggestion sounds to me like it would require the
> desugaring process to know something about types, but I'm not sure.
> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
> Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
More information about the Haskell-Cafe