Hoogle Search
Within LTS Haskell 17.4 (ghc8.10.4)
Note that Stackage only displays results for the latest LTS and Nightly snapshot. Learn more.
(
. ) :: Monad m => ConduitM a b m () > ConduitM b c m r > ConduitM a c m rconduit Data.Conduit Combine two Conduits together into a new Conduit (aka fuse). Output from the upstream (left) conduit will be fed into the downstream (right) conduit. Processing will terminate when downstream (right) returns. Leftover data returned from the right Conduit will be discarded. Equivalent to fuse and =$=, however the latter is deprecated and will be removed in a future version. Note that, while this operator looks like categorical composition (from Control.Category), there are a few reasons it's different:
 The position of the type parameters to ConduitT do not match. We would need to change ConduitT i o m r to ConduitT r m i o, which would preclude a Monad or MonadTrans instance.
 The result value from upstream and downstream are allowed to differ between upstream and downstream. In other words, we would need the type signature here to look like ConduitT a b m r > ConduitT b c m r > ConduitT a c m r.
 Due to leftovers, we do not have a left identity in Conduit. This can be achieved with the underlying Pipe datatype, but this is not generally recommended. See https://stackoverflow.com/a/15263700.
(
. ) :: Monad m => ConduitM a b m () > ConduitM b c m r > ConduitM a c m rconduit Data.Conduit.Internal Combine two Conduits together into a new Conduit (aka fuse). Output from the upstream (left) conduit will be fed into the downstream (right) conduit. Processing will terminate when downstream (right) returns. Leftover data returned from the right Conduit will be discarded. Equivalent to fuse and =$=, however the latter is deprecated and will be removed in a future version. Note that, while this operator looks like categorical composition (from Control.Category), there are a few reasons it's different:
 The position of the type parameters to ConduitT do not match. We would need to change ConduitT i o m r to ConduitT r m i o, which would preclude a Monad or MonadTrans instance.
 The result value from upstream and downstream are allowed to differ between upstream and downstream. In other words, we would need the type signature here to look like ConduitT a b m r > ConduitT b c m r > ConduitT a c m r.
 Due to leftovers, we do not have a left identity in Conduit. This can be achieved with the underlying Pipe datatype, but this is not generally recommended. See https://stackoverflow.com/a/15263700.
(
. ) :: (b > c) > Strategy b > (a > b) > a > cparallel Control.Parallel.Strategies Sequential function composition. The result of the second function is evaluated using the given strategy, and then given to the first function.
(
. ) :: Monad m => Conduit a b m () > Conduit b c m r > Conduit a c m rfoundation Foundation.Conduit Operator version of fuse.
(
. ) :: Strategy a > Strategy a > Strategy aLambdaHack Game.LambdaHack.Client.AI.Strategy Strategy with the actions from both argument strategies, with original frequencies.

classypreludeconduit ClassyPrelude.Conduit Combine two Conduits together into a new Conduit (aka fuse). Output from the upstream (left) conduit will be fed into the downstream (right) conduit. Processing will terminate when downstream (right) returns. Leftover data returned from the right Conduit will be discarded. Equivalent to fuse and =$=, however the latter is deprecated and will be removed in a future version. Note that, while this operator looks like categorical composition (from Control.Category), there are a few reasons it's different:
 The position of the type parameters to ConduitT do not match. We would need to change ConduitT i o m r to ConduitT r m i o, which would preclude a Monad or MonadTrans instance.
 The result value from upstream and downstream are allowed to differ between upstream and downstream. In other words, we would need the type signature here to look like ConduitT a b m r > ConduitT b c m r > ConduitT a c m r.
 Due to leftovers, we do not have a left identity in Conduit. This can be achieved with the underlying Pipe datatype, but this is not generally recommended. See https://stackoverflow.com/a/15263700.

ghcihexcalc Data.GHex Bitwise "or"
>>> 0xf000 . 0xa 0x0000_0000_0000_f00a
(
. ) :: Operator (null 'PGtsquery) (null 'PGtsquery) (null 'PGtsquery)squealpostgresql Squeal.PostgreSQL.Expression.TextSearch OR tsquerys together

stack Stack.Prelude Combine two Conduits together into a new Conduit (aka fuse). Output from the upstream (left) conduit will be fed into the downstream (right) conduit. Processing will terminate when downstream (right) returns. Leftover data returned from the right Conduit will be discarded. Equivalent to fuse and =$=, however the latter is deprecated and will be removed in a future version. Note that, while this operator looks like categorical composition (from Control.Category), there are a few reasons it's different:
 The position of the type parameters to ConduitT do not match. We would need to change ConduitT i o m r to ConduitT r m i o, which would preclude a Monad or MonadTrans instance.
 The result value from upstream and downstream are allowed to differ between upstream and downstream. In other words, we would need the type signature here to look like ConduitT a b m r > ConduitT b c m r > ConduitT a c m r.
 Due to leftovers, we do not have a left identity in Conduit. This can be achieved with the underlying Pipe datatype, but this is not generally recommended. See https://stackoverflow.com/a/15263700.
(
.. ) :: Bits a => a > a > abase Data.Bits Bitwise "or"
Page 1 of many  Next