From: Dave Berry <dave@kal.com>
To: Charles Martin <martin@chasm.org>, caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: RE: New Year's resolution suggestions...
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 13:25:18 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3145774E67D8D111BE6E00C0DF418B6639BB14@nt.kal.com> (raw)
>From experience with SML, I believe that any benefit from explicit
precedence definitions is far outweighed by the cost. It complicates the
implementation (e.g. requiring more information to be shared across
compilation boundaries), it complicates the syntax (requiring new
declaration formats), and IMO it can actually make programs harder to read
(because you can't mentally parse infix expressions without checking the
precedence declarations).
Dave.
-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Martin [mailto:martin@chasm.org]
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 15:38
To: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: New Year's resolution suggestions...
>You mean that the actual implicit way of specifying associativity and
>precedence of users's defined operators is not powerful enough for your
>programs ?
It is probably powerful enough as it stands. But it restricts me to the
naming scheme that has been chosen for me, which I don't like. What if
some kind of Hungarian notation for alphanumeric identifiers was enforced
by the compiler? That would be awful. This feels kind of the same.
This is not nearly as big a wish as for some kind of overloading! :)
Charles
next reply other threads:[~2001-01-04 13:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-01-04 13:25 Dave Berry [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-01-02 23:33 Charles Martin
2001-01-03 13:14 ` Pierre Weis
2001-01-03 15:38 ` Charles Martin
2001-01-03 16:27 ` Brian Rogoff
2001-01-04 20:31 ` Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3145774E67D8D111BE6E00C0DF418B6639BB14@nt.kal.com \
--to=dave@kal.com \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=martin@chasm.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).