Smylers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Phew! I'm slightly concerned at this list making Piers's job too easy,
but have tried to minimize that effect by posting on a Monday (meaning
that this mail is ineligible for inclusion in the next summary and is
likely to be out of date by the time of the
The many recent suggestions for denoting vector operators all seem to
have problems, with some having significant impact elsewhere in the
language. After reading a few hundred mails on the subject I'm no
longer sure what I prefer, but thought I'd be in a better position to
have an opinion if I at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Smylers) writes:
Thank you very, very much for this; this is supremely helpful.
» No character left for eating whitespace.
That's a feature, not a bug! The space-eater alternately worries, confuses
and scares me.
--
I want you to know that I create nice things like
Smylers summarized (beautifully, thank-you):
* the looks like an array option: [op]
» Seemed a nice idea, but doesn't work with other use of square
brackets.
Could be made to work. Suppose that every operator definition (explicit or
implicit) automagically also defined a variant
