Rocco Moretti wrote: > Terry Hancock wrote: > >> One thing that I also think would be good is to open up the >> operator set for Python. Right now you can overload the >> existing operators, but you can't easily define new ones. >> And even if you do, you are very limited in what you can >> use, and understandability suffers. > > > One of the issues that would need to be dealt with in allowing new > operators to be defined is how to work out precedence rules for the new > operators. Right now you can redefine the meaning of addition and > multiplication, but you can't change the order of operations. (Witness > %, and that it must have the same precedence in both multiplication and > string replacement.) > > If you allow (semi)arbitrary characters to be used as operators, some > scheme must be chosen for assigning a place in the precedence hierarchy.
Speaking maybe only for myself: I don't like implicit rules, so I don't like also any precedence hierarchy being in action, so for safety reasons I always write even 8+6*2 (==20) as 8+(6*2) to be sure all will go the way I expect it. Claudio -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
