Flipped function application

[Oren Ben-Kiki]

+1 for a flipped function operator.

It makes reading a pipeline of operations more natural. "x & foo & bar &
baz" means take x, apply foo, then apply bar... it makes the source code
read easily without having to push and pop operations from a mental stack
or reading the source in an unnatural direction "baz $ bar $ foo x".

And when it comes to lenses, I can't imagine not being able to write "foo &
bar .~ x & baz .~ y".



On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 8:23 PM, Erik Hesselink <hesselink at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Wvv <vitea3v at rambler.ru> wrote:
> > 2.1) Some people are against this function at all
> > 2.2) Some people do not want to have this function, but not categorically
> > 2.3) Few(?) people doesn't care
> > 2.4) Many people wish to add flipped function application
>
> I think this phrasing is too loaded given the actual numbers. I've
> counted in this thread, being generous with the +1s (bikeshedding the
> name counts as an implicit +1) and I find 11 in favor, 7 against and 6
> unknown/don't care.
>
> Erik
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20131012/499a801a/attachment.html>