Negation

[Ross Paterson]

On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 01:24:55PM -0800, John Meacham wrote:
> What would be the actual change proposed? If it is something concrete
> and not something like "negatives should be interpreted as unary minus
> when otherwise it would lead to a parse error" then that wouldn't be
> good. I have enough issues with the layout rule as is :)

I imagine it would be something like deleting the production

    lexp6    ->      - exp7

and adding the production

    exp10    ->      - fexp