On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 01:31:43PM -0400, Rob Kinyon wrote:
: > I'm sticking to non-words here, as I mentally parse not and true as
: > single-arg subs, single-arg subs as unary operators, etcetera. I can't
: > help it, but I have absolutely no idea how to determine the difference.
: > Is it &prefix:<not> or just &not? I have no idea. I do know that it's
: > &infix:<x>, not &x.
: Though, P6 mayl give us the ability to create circumfix operators (as
: seen in the entire reduce thread). I think that syntax will also allow
: for functions to be parsed as infix operators, right?

Sure, but in that case we usually call them methods.  :-)


Reply via email to