[bitc-dev] Opinions wanted: Infix shift operators

[Jonathan S. Shapiro]

On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 12:23 PM, wren ng thornton <wren at freegeek.org> wrote:

> > Hi!
> >
> > Why not do like haskell and say
> >
> > S typevar typevar
> >
> > instead of S<typevar, typevar>?
> >
> > Like Either Integer String
> I'm very much in favor of the whitespace application syntax.


Because this isn't Haskell.

In the BitC use domain, it is important to be able to take full advantage of
the native calling convention. Because of this, arity is part of type. That
is, the types:

  int x int -> int
  int -> int -> int

are not the same.

I would actually prefer to use the currying syntax myself, and if someone
can show me how to make that work I think I would adopt it.

shap
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.coyotos.org/pipermail/bitc-dev/attachments/20100805/a1f61a18/attachment.html