Fractional precedences? Re: Operator precedence help
lemming at henning-thielemann.de
Thu Sep 3 19:10:15 UTC 2020
On Thu, 3 Sep 2020, Tikhon Jelvis wrote:
> In the proposals for relative precedences that I've heard before, it
> would be a syntactic error to use two operators that *don't* have
> explicitly defined relationships without parentheses. + and * would work
> together the way you would expect from math, but you simply wouldn't be
> able to mix them with ++ without parentheses. Seems like this would
> avoid spooky action at a distance since operators that aren't clearly
> related simply don't have relative precedences at all.
> Not sure how to handle operators like $ in a system like that though.
($) in GHC is already an exception because it works with forall-quantified
More information about the Libraries