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
> 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?
Email or GTalk: a...@ajs.com