patch applied (haskell-prime-status): add ""Make $ left associative, like application"

Neil Mitchell ndmitchell at
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 mailing list