Browse thread
Having '<<', why to use '|>' ?
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Fabrice Marchant <fabrice.marchant@o...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Having '<<', why to use '|>' ? |
Thanks Julien !
> Have a look at this:
> http://caml.inria.fr/pub/docs/manual-ocaml/lex.html#infix-symbol
> With the keywords below.
"Note that the following identifiers are keywords of the Camlp4 extensions and should be avoided for compatibility reasons.
parser << <: >> $ $$ $:
"
So no doubt, I'll edit my old programs and replace "<<".
> > ... a composition operator ... ( <<< ) ?
> > What else ?
> I would personally double the '@':
> let (@@) f g x = f @ g x
( or f (g x) : it is practically the same thing. )
A 3 chars operator (<<<) doesn't look smart. Simpler is better.
However, about (@@), I preferred to see the direction of the asymmetric composition operator.
( <| ) instead of ( << ) ? Is this a possible idea ?
But maybe your idea is good. Maths use a kind of small 'o' : (f o g) (x) = f (g (x)).
It's symmetric like (@@), and that doesn't raise any problem.
Cheers,
Fabrice