Proposal: Add (&) to Data.Function

[Michael Sloan]

And the results of the IRC discussion on lens:
https://github.com/ekmett/lens/issues/100

I do think that this looks nicer, for whatever reason.  While the mnemonic
of "mod"ulus can suggest modify once you know that, (&) somewhat naturally
suggests "and then" ... "and then".  I still prefer (#) for overall
consistency and history, but other than its conjunction connotations, (&)
is mnemonically better.

It'll be funny to mix diagrams and lens code - (&) is used for sticking
coordinates together for points / vectors - while (#) would stand in for
(&).


On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Michael Sloan <mgsloan at gmail.com> wrote:

> (#) is also used by the diagrams library, mainly for using functions as if
> they were "attributes".
>
> In the context of lens, this is discussed a bit here:
> https://github.com/ekmett/lens/issues/17
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 9:31 AM, Stephen Tetley <stephen.tetley at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> "Haskell" called this operator (#) about 12 years ago - see Peter
>> Thiemann's WASH and Eric Meijer and colleagues MS Agent scripting.
>>
>> I'd much prefer (#) if it didn't interfere with GHC's magic hash, I
>> suspect the above authors were using Hugs...
>>
>> On 20 November 2012 17:19, Dan Burton <danburton.email at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Just to bring up some prior art, from what I've heard, F# calls this |>.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Libraries mailing list
>> Libraries at haskell.org
>> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20121120/3693d18b/attachment.htm>