On 03/08/07, Chris Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sebastian Sylvan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'd also like to reiterate my request for a notation that doesn't > > require brackets around the *action* but will also work by applying it > > to a function which when fully applied to its argument returns an > > action (i.e.: $foo x y + $bar z w, rather than $(foo x y) + $(bar z > > w)). Function application is normally very low-noise in Haskell > > (good), and it would be nice if we can keep it low-noise in this > > notation too. > > I'm trying to understand your suggestion. Can you tell me how you'd > sugar the following? > > getA :: Friggle MyA > getB :: Friggle MyB > foo :: Int -> MyB -> Friggle MyC > > do a <- getA > b <- getB a > foo 42 b > Something like:
foo 42 (#getB #getA)? Is there an ambiguity that I'm to dense to see here? :-) -- Sebastian Sylvan +44(0)7857-300802 UIN: 44640862 _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
