Hi,<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Johan Tibell <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:johan.tibell@gmail.com">johan.tibell@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 12:16 AM, Henning Thielemann<br>
<<a href="mailto:lemming@henning-thielemann.de">lemming@henning-thielemann.de</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009, Ross Paterson wrote:<br>
><br>
>> This proposal seems to have got stuck. Everyone wants an infix operator,<br>
>> but we can't agree what it should be.<br>
<br>
This proposal seems to have got stuck *again*.<br>
<br>
This is a call for consensus. Do we agree to add<br>
<br>
infixr 6 <><br>
<br>
(<>) :: Monoid m => m -> m -> m<br>
(<>) = mappend<br>
<br>
If so I have a patch for base and GHC ready.<br>
<br>
-- Johan<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Libraries mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Libraries@haskell.org">Libraries@haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries" target="_blank">http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br>I already use this synonym a lot, but I currently have to define it each time. So, I agree in accept this proposal.<br><br>--<br>Daniel Díaz<br>