Hello, while I agree that operators are usually more useful als type constructors than as type variables, I’m wondering if it is future-proof to completely get rid of a possibility for infix type variables. With the type class system getting stronger and stronger, would this not mean that there will be more and more use cases for infix type variables? Maybe the change should at keep a (small) window open. Maybe, similar to the current situation, a special character to indicate variables, not constructors?
(I have no good idea, but here is at least one: A dot '.' as the first character indicates a type variable; compared to a ':' this is a non-capitalized character). Also, is there maybe another way of distinguishing constructors and variables, besides capitalization, that works equally well for operators and non-operators? That could also help if a user would like to use unicode characters in the name of a constructor that are letters but don’t have a upper or titlecase variant. But then, this has probably been given thought a long time ago, without a better solution than capitalization resp. leading ':'. Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner [email protected] | [email protected] | GPG: 0x4743206C xmpp: [email protected] | http://www.joachim-breitner.de/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
