Bartosz Milewski seems to like D more than C++ now :)

[Max Samukha]

On Tuesday, 24 September 2013 at 14:24:48 UTC, renoX wrote:
> On Tuesday, 24 September 2013 at 14:15:12 UTC, Max Samukha 
> wrote:
> [cut]
>> I think that -> is neither unnecessary nor noise. After having 
>> played with Haskell for a while, I actually find the syntax of 
>> D unnecessarily redundant.
>
> Oh, D is hardly a good example for syntax! Better than C++ 
> doesn't say much..

Ok.

> That said, I don't see how one could prefer 'a -> b -> c' over 
> 'a,b -> c' in this case..

In case of Haskell, it is not a matter of preference. The syntax 
follows from the language semantics and I don't see how it can be 
different and better at the same time. (a, b) -> c means a 
function that maps a pair to an object (the same as ((,) a b) -> 
c). a -> b -> c, parens around b -> c omitted thanks to right 
associativity, means a function that maps an object to a 
function. How does a, b -> c fits in this picture?

>
>>> This is not the only 'visual noise' in Haskell: for example 
>>> Idris replaced '::' by ':', a good change IMHO.
>>
>> That is probably because ':' is the list append operator 
>> already.
>
> Yes, it's the other way round in Idris, but for once I prefer 
> D's operator '~': list appending is common enough that it 
> deserves a proper operator not a doubled one :: like in Idris 
> or other (Scala?).
>

Sadly, I don't know Idris or Scala.

Now we are talking about subjective preferences, which is an 
exercise in futility. :)

> renoX