Re: Fractional/negative fixity?

[Lennart Augustsson]

On Nov 7, 2006, at 11:47 , [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Tue, 7 Nov 2006, Simon Marlow wrote:

I'd support fractional and negative fixity.  It's a simple change to
make, but we also have to adopt

http://hackage.haskell.org/cgi-bin/haskell-prime/trac.cgi/wiki/ 
FixityResolution

I've added the proposal to the end of that page.  In fact, the page
already mentioned that we could generalise fixity levels, but it  
didn't
mention fractional or negative values being allowed.

Maybe that page could also mention earlier proposals and the  
solutions
without precedence numbers. I prefer the non-numeric approach with  
rules
like "(<) binds more tightly than (&&)", because it says what is  
intended
and it allows to make things unrelated that are unrelated, e.g. infix
operators from different libraries. Consequently a precedence  
relation to
general infix operators like ($) and (.) had be defined in each  
library.

I think that computable real fixity levels are useful, too. A further
step to complex numbers is not advised because those cannot be  
ordered.

But ordering of the computable reals is not computable.  So it could  
cause the compiler to loop during parsing. :)

        -- Lennart

_______________________________________________
Haskell-prime mailing list
Haskell-prime@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime