On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Jonathan Worthington <jonat...@jnthn.net>wrote:

> Aaron Sherman wrote:
>> See below for the S06 section I'm referring to.
>> I'm wondering how we should be reading the description of user-defined
>> operators. For example, "sub infix:<(c)>" doesn't describe
>> the precedence level of this new op, so how is it parsed? Is there a
>> default?
> The default is same as infix:<+> for infix ops, however the is prec trait
> (and some other related ones) should also be available (but not yet
> implemented in Rakudo).

That's good stuff. Is that in the synopses? I swear, I'm going to get around
to writing a full index for those things ;-)

> The method case makes no sense to me. It almost certainly won't be any use
> unless the method gets exported, since operator dispatches are always sub
> dispatch. Maybe that example is a fossil that should go away. And if not,
> then yes, it most certainly would want to be written in terms of self, not
> have a parameter. So something is wonky with the spec here.
> Hope this helps a little,
Yeah, that definitely helps, thanks!

Anyone want to jump in on the macro stuff? Or is that really just waiting on
an implementation to hammer out the details?

Aaron Sherman
Email or GTalk: a...@ajs.com

Reply via email to