|
|
|
## Eliminate . as an operator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In early Haskell, . was used as function composition. In later versions of Haskell, it also became used as a name qualifier.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
These two uses do not fit well together, leading to special lexical rules (P11 of the report). As a test, before reading the report, can you lex the following: "f.g", "F.g", "F . g", "f..", "F..", and "F.". I couldn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Proposal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserve . for use as a qualifier in names. Do not permit . as an operator symbol. (Also continue to permit it as a decimal point in floats).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Pros
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Much much simpler. Not impossible to remember.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Cons
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- We lose . as composition. Mostly this doesn't matter as $ is probably more common in reality anyway. Perhaps use `o` as infix composition instead if it is really important.
|
|
|
|
- We need to make a special case of .. in the \[m .. n\] case. |