Operators for everything (was Re: Operators for matrix)

[Bill Whiten]

In article <39789C90.B1212E48 at prescod.net>, Paul Prescod
<paul at prescod.net> wrote:

> Michael Hudson wrote:
> > 
> > The semantics would be:
> > 
> > a @<id> b === <id>(a,b)
> > 
> > for any valid identifier <id>.
> > 
> > There are still precedence issues, but I think they can be ignored
> > (make everything of this from the same (low) precedence & left
> > asssociative).
> 
> I like this idea. Is it appropriate to have just the whitespace as the
> delimiter though?
You could terminate with another @ or _ . Or these, plus the alternative
of white space. None is perfect - but it could be practical and useful.

> 
> It also seems like it could be combined (perhaps painfully) with the
> requirement that some operators take parameters:
> 
> a @foo(x,y) b
This could build a nice tensor notation. Eg the arguments specify the
summing subscripts.

Regards,
-----------
Bill Whiten,                                     W.Whiten at mailbox.uq.oz.au
Julius Kruttschnitt Mineral Research Centre,
The University Of Queensland,                       Tel: int +61 7 3365 5888
Isles Rd, Indooroopilly,                            Fax: int +61 7 3365 5999
Brisbane Qld 4068, AUSTRALIA.