On Tue, November 27, 2007 10:50, Waldemar Kornewald wrote: > >> In the meantime: given that the object system was created to >> eliminate C(++), and the message syntax was created to keep me sane, >> and I can never remember the traditional (C or similar) precedence >> rules without a huge poster on my wall and lots of redundant >> parentheses to be 101% sure the compiler understands them too, I have >> to side with the three-level 'message-passing' precedence rules. >> But, with the promise that it will be trivial for anyone to change >> the way any particular selectors are parsed in the very near future. > > I think that the absolute majority of programmers works with a > language that has C-like syntax or at least math precedence. I doubt > that they want to re-learn their habits just because a minority thinks > it's better. IMHO, the default behavior should match what most people > are already used to (and thus probably expect), so adoption isn't > hindered too much. > I work mostly with Python and C so I'm used to C syntax, but I consider precedence rules an unnecessary evil. One of the things that APL got right for linear infix mathematical expressions was its right to left execution and avoidance of complex precedence rules. Two dimensional notation, as in traditional mathematics, and which will be supported by Fortress, is another way to avoid reliance on precedence rules.
# Steve _______________________________________________ fonc mailing list [email protected] http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
