Re: [q-lang-users] New stuff in cvs: multichar ops, views

[John C. <co...@cc...>]

Rob Hubbard scripsit:

> I think that the last here is the wrong result. Could the precedence
> of (+:) be raised? I think that (+:) should bind more tightly even
> than (^) exponentiation, so perhaps it should have the precedence of
> (.) function composition.

+1

> On the subject of (+:), I wondered whether there could be another
> operator (-:) having the meaning "-i*", just as (+:) has meaning
> "+i*". Then rather that this:

This is clever but not really necessary, I think.

-- 
John Cowan  co...@cc...  http://ccil.org/~cowan
The competent programmer is fully aware of the strictly limited size of his own
skull; therefore he approaches the programming task in full humility, and among
other things he avoids clever tricks like the plague.  --Edsger Dijkstra