massimo
How difficult would it be to add the infix notation à la Haskell?
I think it could improve readability on several occasions
For example
rem(5, 3)
could be written as
5 `rem` 3
or
Enum.into(list, %{})
list |> Enum.into(%{})
could become
list `Enum.into` %{}
Where Next?
Trending in Discussions
Other Trending Topics
Latest on Elixir Forum
Sponsor Spotlight
Master modern tools, write cleaner code, and tackle real-world challenges with Manning books, videos, and courses. Start building today.
Categories:
Sub Categories:
Forums
Popular Tags
- #ecto
- #liveview
- #troubleshooting
- #learning-elixir
- #library
- #deployment
- #erlang
- #testing
- #genserver
- #mix
- #absinthe
- #remote-other
- #otp
- #plug
- #how-to-question
- #macros
- #postgres
- #elixirconf
- #channels
- #exunit
- #discussion
- #code-sync
- #podcasts
- #javascript
- #onsite
- #dialyzer
- #docker
- #authentication
- #umbrella
- #full-time-contract
- #podcasts-by-brainlid
- #ecto-query
- #elixirconf-us
- #ai
- #blog-post
- #elixir-ls
- #phoenix_html
- #iex
- #graphql
- #genstage
- #websockets
- #supervisor
- #advent-of-code
- #distillery
- #processes
- #api
- #forms
- #metaprogramming
- #hex
- #security
Our Sponsors
Build Elixir applications with speed and confidence.
We build reliable cloud platforms for business-critical systems.
Catch errors, track performance, monitor hosts and more.
Error tracking, logs, uptime, and Just Enough APM. Built for developers.
Elixir, Erlang & BEAM conferences from Code Sync - join us in 2026!
Practical resources that improve the lives of professional developers.
Master modern tools, write cleaner code, and tackle real-world challenges.
**Building the future of software with AI, trust, and human connection.**
The team behind Membrane, Popcorn, LiveDebugger. Available for hire.
Courses that'll move you from confusion to "Aha, now I get it!"
First Post!- Show Best Posts
- Show All (oldest first)
- Show All (newest first)
stefanchrobot
The question is: why? You kind of get it with pipes (see the example you’ve shown).
Most Liked
josevalim
Even if it more readable in some cases, we need very strong reasons to add yet another way of doing things to the language, and I am afraid we don’t have enough pros here to justify it, especially because “more natural” and “readability” mostly boils down to personal preference.
Such feature will complicate the grammar and understanding of the language. If we add it, now every team will ask themselves: when do we use the infix notation? Should we always use it? Never use it? And this is time better spent elsewhere.
peerreynders
That’s an entirely subjective judgement.
In my personal view Haskell got a bit sidetracked from “lambda calculus” by trying to mimic “mathematical notation”.
What’s so special about functions of arity 2 that they deserve some special place in the universe to be “promoted to operators”? Functions are simple, operators merely confuse the issue (then there is the ternary operator - but there can’t be an infix notation for that).
And I’m fully aware that my opinion is informed, coloured, biased from Clojure (i.e. Lisp) - what can be more simple than
(fn a b c d)?(+ a b)may not look very mathematical but it conforms in a world built on functions …rvirding
Parentheses rule!
And it is simple and extremely consistent as everything has the same format.
Last Post!
dorgan
Is that really more clear/expressive than this?
or even
I guess it’s a matter of preference but the only thing valuable I see in your example is
mapas a more general(as in generic functor map) instead of justEnum.map.I get the value of a Functor and maybe even Monad or Monoid in your codebase if you enjoy these generalised operations in your codebase, but when it comes to functional composition I find the examples in this thread rather alien and fail to see what’s so pragmatic about it in this language.