[m-rev.] for review: user-defined operator tables

[Fergus Henderson]

On 06-Nov-2001, Simon Taylor <stayl at cs.mu.OZ.AU> wrote:
> 
> 	Make the priority of operator terms (X `op` Y) 1, not 100.
> 	The reference manual states that operator terms have
> 	the highest precedence possible.
...
NEWS:
> +* We've fixed a bug in the parser. The Mercury Language Reference Manual
> +  states that operator terms (X `op` Y) have the lowest possible priority,
> +  however in the implementation they had a higher priority than the unary
> +  prefix operator `^'.

For this one, I think the reference manual should change,
rather than the implementation.

I think we discussed this explicitly when `^' was added,
and decided that it ought to have a higher priority than back-quoted
operators, it's just that this part of the reference manual
wasn't updated to reflect that.

> library/bitmap.m:
> library/hash_table.m:
> 	Fix a few places where parentheses are required because
> 	operator terms now have the lowest possible priority.
> 	`rem' is an operator -- it doesn't need backquotes.

These changes shouldn't be needed (although the `rem' ones are probably an
improvement anyway).

I haven't reviewed the rest of it, but the log message sounds OK.

-- 
Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs.mu.oz.au>  | "... it seems to me that 15 years of
The University of Melbourne         | email is plenty for one lifetime."
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>  |     -- Prof. Donald E. Knuth
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-reviews mailing list
post:  mercury-reviews at cs.mu.oz.au
administrative address: owner-mercury-reviews at cs.mu.oz.au
unsubscribe: Address: mercury-reviews-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: unsubscribe
subscribe:   Address: mercury-reviews-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: subscribe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------