user-defined operators

Robert Virding robert.virding@REDACTED
Tue May 4 00:38:51 CEST 2004

Now that the argument seems to have died down, although it has only gone a
month, I can come along with my opinion. I think we should add user-defined
operators of the type:

Arg1 `op` Arg2  --> op(Arg1, Arg2)
`op` Arg  -->  op(Arg)

This is what have understood the basic suggestion  to be, if I am wrong then
tell me gently. It is really just syntactic sugar so I don't really see what
the problem is. At the moment I don't realy see the need for it, but who
knows after a year. I think the only interesting question is when the
transformation should be made, immediately so you don't see the original
operator version or later. But this is just details.

!! I don't like because it is too much a special case of something general.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Hakan Mattsson" <hakan@REDACTED>
To: "Richard A. O'Keefe" <ok@REDACTED>
Cc: <erlang-questions@REDACTED>
Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 10:54 AM
Subject: Re: user-defined operators

> On Fri, 2 Apr 2004, Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:
> > operation.  It's a function d--nit!
> > Then what the h**l is the point of opposing them?
> > Well, gee, if I wasn't already taking that for granted, there would be
> Please, drop this infected thread.
> /Håkan

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list