On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 3:50 AM, Heinrich Apfelmus <apfel...@quantentunnel.de> wrote: >> Combined with >>= / >> you have multiple reading direction in the same >> expression, as in >> >> expression ( c . b . a ) `liftM` a1 >>= a2 >>= a3 >> reading order 6 5 4 1 2 3 > > That's why I'm usually using =<< instead of >>= .
Does it bother you that (=<<) is defined to be infixr 1, while (<$>) and (<*>) are infixl 4? Or is that just me? For instance, I might write the above expression as something like: a3 =<< a2 =<< a . b . c <$> a1 But this still seems awkward, because it mixes different fixities and I have to mentally regroup things when reading it. Right associativity here does make a certain amount of sense for monads, but left-associativity is consistent with plain function application and feels more natural to me. - C. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
