From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAF98BB9C for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:14:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id k0KGEe7Y032473 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:14:40 +0100 Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA30768 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:14:39 +0100 (MET) Received: from mail.cs.unm.edu (mail.cs.unm.edu [64.106.20.33]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id k0KGEcNr006163 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:14:39 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.cs.unm.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13519E41FB; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:14:38 -0700 (MST) Received: from mail.cs.unm.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 08212-05; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:14:37 -0700 (MST) Received: from deimos.cs.unm.edu (deimos.cs.unm.edu [64.106.21.29]) by mail.cs.unm.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id D14E0E41DF; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:14:37 -0700 (MST) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:13:57 -0700 (MST) From: "William D. Neumann" To: Alessandro Baretta Cc: Ocaml Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Associativity of new operators In-Reply-To: <43D10AA1.8050102@barettadeit.com> Message-ID: References: <43D10AA1.8050102@barettadeit.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at cs.unm.edu X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 43D10C70.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 43D10C6E.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 baretta:01 toplevel:01 recorder:98 wrote:01 defined:01 neumann:02 neumann:02 black:96 alessandro:03 depends:04 fri:05 manual:06 edu:07 life:90 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 On Fri, 20 Jan 2006, Alessandro Baretta wrote: > The above toplevel session shows that the associativity of newly defined > operators depends on the name of the operator itself. Is there a general rule > to determine the associativity of the operator? I believe this is covered in section 6.7 of the manual. William D. Neumann --- "There's just so many extra children, we could just feed the children to these tigers. We don't need them, we're not doing anything with them. Tigers are noble and sleek; children are loud and messy." -- Neko Case Life is unfair. Kill yourself or get over it. -- Black Box Recorder