I was testing something https://caub.github.io/misc/calculator, and I didn't see how it would be a problem to have the precedence of ** higher than unaries.
But at least I'm happy something like (2).pow(3) wasn't chosen. Thanks anyway and sorry for discussing something already frozen in spec anyway 2016-10-14 14:33 GMT+02:00 Cyril Auburtin <cyril.aubur...@gmail.com>: > Ah, ok, a bit sad because all more scientific languages, and python too, > all math books, all will use `-e^3` for meaning `-(e^3)` (^ or **), because > it's just `-exp(3)` or `-pow(E, 3)` > > and `(-1)^n` otherwise, when we want to take the signs with. > > If you wanted to avoid any confusion you could have forbidden `2**2**3` > too because it's not obvious it's right associative > > But ok, thanks for the explanation. > > > 2016-10-14 14:05 GMT+02:00 Bergi <a.d.be...@web.de>: > >> Cyril Auburtin schrieb: >> >>> I would expect `-2**3` to return -8, or `-2**2 == -4`, since it should be >>> like `-(2**3)` >>> >> >> You would, others would not. -2 ** 2 clearly should return 4, shouldn't >> it? >> >> Is there a reason for this restriction? Python does it `-2**3` fine >>> >> >> Because of the ambiguity it has been decided to make it a syntax error if >> the two operators are used together. If you want `-(2**3)`, you have to >> write it like that, and if you want `(-2)**3` you have to write it >> explicitly as well. >> See https://esdiscuss.org/topic/exponentiation-operator-precedence for >> the full discussion. >> >> - Bergi >> >> _______________________________________________ >> es-discuss mailing list >> es-discuss@mozilla.org >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >> > >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
