Re: [Bug-apl] Bug in the parser?

Tue, 25 Nov 2014 07:06:06 -0800

Hi Jay,

yes, what I meant is that / is called like a dyadic function as in 1 1 1 / 1 2 3.

But handling it always like an operator could be a better solution.
Currently in GNU APL operators are distinguished from functions which works well
except for / and friends which are parsed as function in some contexts and parsed as operator in others.

I will look into changing this to making operators accept a non-function left argument.

/// Jürgen
On 11/25/2014 03:33 PM, Jay Foad wrote:
On 25 November 2014 at 14:06, Jay Foad <jay.f...@gmail.com> wrote:

On 25 November 2014 at 13:38, Juergen Sauermann
<juergen.sauerm...@t-online.de> wrote:

I have read the IBM binding rules a number of times but they seem not to
help. The problem of these rules is
that they give different results in the cases where / is an operator and
where / is a function.

In IBM APL2 / is always an operator.

For example:

      1 2/¨3 4 ⍝ GNU APL, NARS2000 and Dyalog: parse as 1 2(/¨)3 4
 3  4 4

     1 2/¨3 4 ⍝ APL2: parse as (1 2/)¨3 4
 3 3 3  4 4 4

Jay.

Reply via email to