Proposal #3339: Add (+>) as a synonym for mappend
nominolo at googlemail.com
Sun Nov 6 18:51:40 CET 2011
That was discussed previously (also in the ticket). Using infixl
would cause performance problems with, e.g., lists and other list-like
structures such as things that translate to CPS.
On 6 November 2011 17:40, Malcolm Wallace <malcolm.wallace at me.com> wrote:
> On 6 Nov 2011, at 16:37, Duncan Coutts wrote:
>> On Sun, 2011-08-14 at 14:22 +0100, Johan Tibell wrote:
>>> On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Paterson, Ross <R.Paterson at city.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>> Johan Tibell writes:
>>>>> This is a call for consensus. Do we agree to add
>>>>> infixr 6 <>
>>>>> (<>) :: Monoid m => m -> m -> m
>>>>> (<>) = mappend
>> Currently Text.Pretty declares infixl 5 <>, <+>.
> So what is the rationale for the new Monoidal operator <> to be declared infixr 6? Why can it not simply preserve the same fixity as already used by Pretty's <> ?
> Libraries mailing list
> Libraries at haskell.org
Push the envelope. Watch it bend.
More information about the Libraries