On 12/08/16 09:53, Ralf Hemmecke wrote:
On 08/12/2016 10:37 AM, oldk1331 wrote:
foo bar.fieldname
OT a little, I think "bar.fieldname" equals to "bar fieldname"? Then one
can still write "foo bar fieldname".
True. Semantically, it's the same. But fields are (at least in our
context)
On 08/12/2016 10:37 AM, oldk1331 wrote:
>>foo bar.fieldname
> OT a little, I think "bar.fieldname" equals to "bar fieldname"? Then one
> can still write "foo bar fieldname".
True. Semantically, it's the same. But fields are (at least in our
context) usually denoted with a dot and changing
>foo bar.fieldname
>
> In such constructions I would write foo(bar.fieldname) just to make it
> clearer for someone who does not remember the precedence rules.
OT a little, I think "bar.fieldname" equals to "bar fieldname"? Then one
can still write "foo bar fieldname". Although I would agree
>a $ b $ c $ x
> Equals to a(b(c(x))),
> In Fricas, I'd like to write "a b c x".
I also like this without parentheses. But not always. For example, a
particular ugly cases
foo bar.fieldname
In such constructions I would write foo(bar.fieldname) just to make it
clearer for someone who
