On Mon, 2006-11-13 at 17:19 +0100, Till Varoquaux wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I don't really understand the point of the */ operator i your
> definition. It's fuy ecause I've cosiderig the same problem recetly ad
> came dow to this approach ( I'm redefining(@)... oe c )

> >    let ( /* ) x y = y x
> >    and ( */ ) x y = x y

The point is precedence: consider only /* then

	x /* f y

means

	x /* (f y)

whereas

	x /* f */ y

means

	(f x) y

Of course

	x /* f */ y z

means

	f x (y z)

but then 

	x + y z

also means

	(+) x (y z)


Also you can write

	x /* g h */ y

which means

	(g h) x y

which is kind of cute, eg:

	[] /* List.fold_left (fun x y -> y::x) */ [1;2;3]


-- 
John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net>
Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net