Hi,
as far as I know, the parentheses are just for better readability.
But I'm sorry to say that you can't add bew operators as far as I know.
You could do that with macros (I believe), but that would be a mess. Just stick
ti the existing ones.
Since I'm also a beginner I'm not entirely sure on
>
> Also another question: is it possible, as in Haskell, to define new
>
infix operators
No. There was some discussion of supporting Haskell-like custom infix with
backticks, but I don't think anyone ever tried to implement it. (and if
backticks syntax is ever freed-up, there are probably
The syntax without parentheses works only for some operators; it does
not work e.g. for `&`, since `&` is also a prefix operator.
There are also some contexts where parsing is ambiguous without the
parentheses, e.g. expressions such as `[+ + +]`. This could be an
array literal with three
Hi,
the user manual says this (VARIABLES section):
"Operators like + are also valid identifiers, but are parsed
specially. In some contexts, operators can be used just like variables;
for example (+) refers to the addition function, and (+) = f will
reassign it."
This looks like Haskell's
