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?