Re: Possible Vector Operator Notations

2002-11-05 Thread Piers Cawley
Smylers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Phew! I'm slightly concerned at this list making Piers's job too easy, > but have tried to minimize that effect by posting on a Monday (meaning > that this mail is ineligible for inclusion in the next summary and is > likely to be out of date by the time of th

Re: Possible Vector Operator Notations

2002-11-04 Thread Damian Conway
Smylers summarized (beautifully, thank-you): * the "looks like an array" option: [op] » Seemed a nice idea, but doesn't work with other use of square brackets. Could be made to work. Suppose that every operator definition (explicit or implicit) automagically also defined a variant

Re: Possible Vector Operator Notations

2002-11-04 Thread Simon Cozens
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Smylers) writes: Thank you very, very much for this; this is supremely helpful. > » No character left for eating whitespace. That's a feature, not a bug! The space-eater alternately worries, confuses and scares me. -- I want you to know that I create nice things like thi

Possible Vector Operator Notations

2002-11-04 Thread Smylers
The many recent suggestions for denoting vector operators all seem to have problems, with some having significant impact elsewhere in the language. After reading a few hundred mails on the subject I'm no longer sure what I prefer, but thought I'd be in a better position to have an opinion if I at