Speaking of small functions

[Jon Fairbairn]

On 2006-10-29 at 09:30EST kahl at cas.mcmaster.ca  wrote:
>  > 
>  > Speaking of small functions, Kleisli composition should at least be in
>  > Control.Monad. It's a simple thing, and not commonly explicitly used
>  > at the moment, but rather important conceptually.
>  > 
>  > (@@) :: (Monad m) => (b -> m c) -> (a -> m b) -> (a -> m c)
>  > g @@ f = \x -> f x >>= g
> 
> I support this strongly.
> 
> My notation is (=>>=), to go with (>>=).

That's a better symbol for it. (@@) could be just about
anything, while (=>>=) is suggestive. Though I think what it
suggests might be with the arguments in a different order?


-- 
Jón Fairbairn                              Jon.Fairbairn at cl.cam.ac.uk