Proposal: change to qualified operator syntax

[Dan Weston]

Would it not be cleaner just to disallow infix notation of qualified 
operators altogether? It is clear enough to use "import qualified" or 
let or where clauses containing prefix notation to identify a qualified 
operator with an unqualified one:

UGLY:

m `Prelude.(>>=)` a
   `Prelude.(>>=)` b
   `Prelude.(>>=)` c


CLEAR:

m >>= a >>= b >>= c
   where (>>=) = Prelude.(>>=)

[Personally, I prefer where to let for such purely syntactic details].

Dan

Simon Marlow wrote:
> Folks,
> 
> Please comment on the following proposed change to qualified operator 
> syntax:
> 
>   http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/wiki/QualifiedOperators
> 
> Cheers,
>     Simon
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-prime mailing list
> Haskell-prime at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
> 
>