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: | 2007-09-18 (16:11) |
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