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

[Ralph Becket]

Michael Day, Monday, 26 November 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?

That would be tempting fate, although I can't see any obvious problem
provided you didn't use it as a pred name.  Still, not recommended.

- Ralph
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
--------------------------------------------------------------------------