Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from July 2010
On 16 July 2010 00:55, Ben Morrow <ben@morrow.me.uk> wrote: > Quoth demerphq@gmail.com (demerphq): >> On 15 July 2010 21:42, Zefram <zefram@fysh.org> wrote: >> >> And because terms are left >> >>associative, >> > >> > It's meaningless to speak of the associativity of a term (atomic >> > expression). The concept of associativity only applies to infix >> > operators. There is in fact a doc bug here, in that perlop ascribes >> > associativity to terms and to "list operators (leftward)" (a list operator >> > expression viewed from the left, from where it looks like a term). >> >> Well, i think there is an ironic misparse involved, and not so much a >> doc bug. The docs say: >> >> Terms and List Operators (Leftward) >> >> but this is in a /section heading/. Looking at the other section >> headings I seems that none of them mention anything about >> associativity. So I think that the above should not be parsed as: >> >> (Terms and List Operators) (Leftward) >> >> but in fact >> >> (Terms) and (List Operators (Leftward)) >> >> Or alternatively: >> >> Terms and Leftward List Operators. >> >> That is, the "(Leftward)" is meant to be a property of List Operators, >> but not of Terms. >> >> The only problem with this interpretation is that there are no "right >> associative" list operators, but perhaps the author was being >> conservative and assumed that maybe one day there would be... > > This is more-or-less correct, but the contrast is with > > List Operators (Rightward) > > much further down (the point being that list operators have different > precedence viewed from the left and from the right). Sigh. I looked for that, and missed it. Thanks Ben. cheers, Yves -- perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"Thread Previous | Thread Next