Hi,
If you just want a short notation for (fun x -> x |> f |> g |> ...),
why not simply define a composition operator?

With
let (->-) f g x =  x |> f |> g;;
you can rewrite the previous expression as f ->- g ->- h ...
I personally don't think that there is any need for a special syntax here.

At the same time, it could be nice if there was a standardized name for
composition operators.

—octachron.

Le 10/10/15 15:52, Nils Becker a écrit :

hi,

just an idea for a short notation which might be appealing:

(|> f |> g |> ... ) as abbreviation for (fun x -> x |> f |> g |> ...)

(|> f) would be just f.

in other words a it's function composition using |> . it looks intuitive
to me. but of course it could be a bad idea for a lot of reasons.

n,

--
Caml-list mailing list.  Subscription management and archives:
https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs