Hi,

While editing the operator precedence table in r.mapcalc.html, I found that

operators with higher precedence have HIGHER numbers. Shouldn't the highest

precedence have the lowest number or 1?

Huidae Cho

Hi,

While editing the operator precedence table in r.mapcalc.html, I found that

operators with higher precedence have HIGHER numbers. Shouldn't the highest

precedence have the lowest number or 1?

Huidae Cho

Huidae Cho wrote:

While editing the operator precedence table in r.mapcalc.html, I found that

operators with higher precedence have HIGHER numbers. Shouldn't the highest

precedence have the lowest number or 1?

That's the usual convention.

--

Glynn Clements <glynn@gclements.plus.com>

On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 05:56:08AM +0100, Glynn Clements wrote:

Huidae Cho wrote:

> While editing the operator precedence table in r.mapcalc.html, I found that

> operators with higher precedence have HIGHER numbers. Shouldn't the highest

> precedence have the lowest number or 1?That's the usual convention.

You mean the convention is that the higher precedence has the higher number?

Huidae Cho

Huidae Cho wrote:

> > While editing the operator precedence table in r.mapcalc.html, I found that

> > operators with higher precedence have HIGHER numbers. Shouldn't the highest

> > precedence have the lowest number or 1?

>

> That's the usual convention.You mean the convention is that the higher precedence has the higher number?

I meant that your suggestion was the usual convention, but in

retrospect it's less clear-cut. E.g. Haskell uses higher numbers for

higher precedence:

infixr 9 .

infixl 9 !!

infixr 8 ^, ^^, **

infixl 7 *, /, `quot`, `rem`, `div`, `mod`, :%, %

infixl 6 +, -

--infixr 5 : -- this fixity declaration is hard-wired into Hugs

infixr 5 ++

infix 4 ==, /=, <, <=, >=, >, `elem`, `notElem`

infixr 3 &&

infixr 2 ||

infixl 1 >>, >>=

infixr 1 =<<

infixr 0 $, $!, `seq`

--

Glynn Clements <glynn@gclements.plus.com>