[m-dev.] Fw: Replacement syntax for DCGs

Michael Day mikeday at bigpond.net.au
Mon Nov 26 16:39:54 AEDT 2001

> It does have the advantage that it makes the threading explicit and
> costs no more than would be the case for an imperative language, for
> example.
> Personally, I'd prefer some explicit notation over hidden threading.

Seems better than EDCGs, and a plausible alternative to DCGs that would be 
better in many circumstances. Would it be possible to use the ! operator 
for anything else without clashes?


mercury-developers mailing list
Post messages to:       mercury-developers at cs.mu.oz.au
Administrative Queries: owner-mercury-developers at cs.mu.oz.au
Subscriptions:          mercury-developers-request at cs.mu.oz.au

More information about the developers mailing list