Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote: > On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Gelf Mrogen <[email protected]> wrote: >>> The problem is that in things like >> > f a b + f c d >>> we do not know how many arguments to "consume" for f until f is typed, >>> and we don't have that information at parse time. >> Can you explain this more? Why not interpret "f a b + f c d" exactly as >> you'd interpret "(f a b) + (f c d)"? > > Because of my assumption that "+" and "a" are both identifiers. I > didn't know about the ML rule that mixfix operators must be > punctuation. It raises a conundrum, though, because now I need to go > look at the UNICODE standard and see if there is an appropriate > character class for what we want, or if not, then what it would take > to build something of that sort.
Unicode has a recommended syntax for identifiers that would exclude '+'. Symbols and punctuation each correspond to a General Category. -- David-Sarah Hopwood ⚥ _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
