Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
OTOH I like the a<b<c shorthand because it's both "obvious" and unambiguous (as long as the return value of < can't be passed as an argument to <, which is typically the case when the return value is boolean and there's no ordering defined on booleans).
It's unambiguous even if the return value of < can be passed as an argument to <. Operators are usually left-associative, right-associative or non-associative. A non-associative operator can have an additional semantics defined when it's used multiple times, just like a,b,c in OCaml is neither a,(b,c) nor (a,b),c, or even a*b*c as a type. -- __("< Marcin Kowalczyk \__/ qrczak@knm.org.pl ^^ http://qrnik.knm.org.pl/~qrczak/