30 Apr
2014
30 Apr
'14
7:24 a.m.
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 2:33 PM, Daniel Fischer < daniel.is.fischer@googlemail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday 30 April 2014, 13:51:38, Rustom Mody wrote:
Without claiming to cover all cases, this is a 'principle' If we have: (⊞) :: a -> a -> b (⟐) :: b -> b -> c then ⊞'s precedence should be higher than ⟐. But what if (⟐) :: b -> b -> a?
Sorry, missed that question tucked away :-) I did say a (not the) principle, not claiming to cover all cases! I guess it should be non-associative (ie infix without l/r) same precedence?