class Function ?

[Ashley Yakeley]

At 2002-10-28 22:41, Nick Name wrote:

>The only thing that should be done is to invent a special name for the
>juxtaposition operator (or just to use $), and to let (->) become an
>instance of the "Function" class.

I think function application has to be primitive and not an operator. 
Otherwise you would end up with this:

f a
 is syntactic sugar for
f `juxtapose` a
 is syntactic sugar for
(juxtapose f) a
 is syntactic sugar for
(juxtapose ((juxtapose juxtapose) f)) a
 is syntactic sugar for
(juxtapose ((juxtapose juxtapose) ((juxtapose ((juxtapose juxtapose) 
juxtapose)) f))) a
etc.


-- 
Ashley Yakeley, Seattle WA