Steve,
I think there is an inherent conflict that makes a difference if the by is
implicit v. explicit.
2 to (3 to 4) doesn't seem natural, yet0 to 15 by (2 to 5) does.
David
________________________________
From: Steve Wampler <[email protected]>
To: David Gamey <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Sent: Thu, July 22, 2010 8:12:11 PM
Subject: Re: [Unicon-group] i to j by expr curiosity
David Gamey wrote:
> I think right associative would have been a better choice and more
> natural. Probably too late to change?
Very much too late. There are very few right-associative operators
in Icon/Unicon. (Most of them are variations of assignment.)
I'm not convinced that having '2 to 3 to 4' evaluate as
'2 to (3 to 4)' is any more natural than '(2 to 3) to 4'.
Afterall, we're satisfied with 2/3/4 evaluating as (2/3)/4. :)
--
Steve Wampler -- [email protected]
The gods that smiled on your birth are now laughing out loud.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint
What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone?
Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first
_______________________________________________
Unicon-group mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/unicon-group
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint
What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone?
Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first
_______________________________________________
Unicon-group mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/unicon-group
