Re: perl6storm #0050

[Dave Storrs]

On Sat, 23 Sep 2000, raptor wrote:

> > On Thu, 21 Sep 2000, Tom Christiansen wrote:
> >
> > > =item perl6storm #0050
> > >
> > > Radical notion: consider removing precedence.
> > > Wrong precedence makes people miserable.

> What if we have these 2 rules or no rules AND we can set manualy the
> precedence of all operators... as in PROLOG
> (op(precedencePriority,associativity!,operator)).


        I think this would be very unwise.  Whenever adding a feature, we 
need to ask if the power granted outweighs the potential pitfalls created;
in this case, I don't think it does.  The potential problems of being able
to assign precedence as you see fit (talk about action at a distance!) are
enormous, and it does not seem to lend the same kind of elegant power
that, for example, Damian's HOFs do.

                                Dave