patch applied (haskell-prime-status): add ""Make $ left
associative, like application"
ndmitchell at gmail.com
Wed Apr 23 17:29:01 EDT 2008
> I think it is reasonable to look closely at the motivations for
> wanting to retain the $ as is. Looking through this thread, I can find
> only a single complaint raised (albeit an important one), namely
> backwards compatibility. Yes, such a change would likely break quite a
> few my modules. But like Cale, I would never have expected H' to be
> fully backwards compatible with H98, and thus there would have to be
> some way to migrate anyway. This one seems pretty simple, just let the
> old Prelude be Haskell98.Prelude and import that in old code. Of
> course changes that break backwards compatibility should not be made
> frivolously, but I find it hard to buy having only that as an argument
> for a change that otherwise seems highly reasonable.
I don't want to have to do a brain mode-change between "in a
Haskell98.Prelude" module and "in a Prelude" module. I don't want to
copy code between modules and have it do different things.
We also should remember that a large number of academic papers are
written in Haskell, and unlike libraries, don't get "update releases"
made. This is not a minor tweak - it will break a massive number of
> ps. Though to be honest I really don't see why we don't simply add
> another operator instead of changing an existing one... :-)
(£) anyone?* This seems a massively more sensible idea.
* I appreciate that a lot of non-English users might find it a bit
difficult to hit this key!
More information about the Haskell-prime