Not that I totally understand this, but could you use quotes, infixl *precedence *"and not"
? Chris On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 5:43 PM, Jonathan S. Shapiro <[email protected]>wrote: > The BitC mixfix implementation is finally converging. One difference > between BitC mixfix and others I have read about is that multiple > quasi-keywords can appear between "holes", as in: > > *expr* and not *expr* > > I needed this internally, and there was no good reason not to expose it. > > If we follow the ML/Haskell tradition, the way you write this would be: > > infixl *precedence *_...@not_ > > On the IRC channel, it was suggested that readability would be improved by > using the underscore to indicate keyword separations and something else for > expressions. Perhaps: > > infixl *precedence *$and_not$ > > I agree that this is more readable, but this may turn out to be one of > those cases where respect for past practice is more important than > compatibility with current developer brains in the field. Also, the multiple > keyword case is rare, so we should definitely favor clarity of the simpler > cases. > > Strong opinions either way? Perhaps '@' instead of '$'? > > _______________________________________________ > bitc-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev > >
_______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
