meta user
network profile
| bio | website | en.gravatar.com/aaditmshah |
|---|---|---|
| location | Mumbai, India | |
| age | 20 | |
| visits | member for | 4 months |
| seen | May 17 at 6:43 | |
| stats | profile views | 10 |
I'm an aspiring hacker from Mumbai - I delight in playing chess, reading classical literature, writing poems and novels, and programming games and ciphers.
|
Apr 8 |
awarded | Editor |
|
Apr 8 |
revised |
A noun to describe character sequences between words deleted 10 characters in body; edited title |
|
Apr 7 |
comment |
A noun to describe character sequences between words @Kris - Calling them non-lexical entities sounds too vague. I'm looking for a single-word adjective to describe it. |
|
Apr 7 |
asked | A noun to describe character sequences between words |
|
Mar 9 |
accepted | How would you describe an operator which has no fixity? |
|
Mar 8 |
comment |
How would you describe an operator which has no fixity? That being said the question really isn't about whether such a formal system can be implemented. The question is how one would describe such a formal system, which is irrespective of whether it exists. In that domain the question is perfectly valid and certainly not moot. |
|
Mar 8 |
comment |
How would you describe an operator which has no fixity? Technically speaking in a strongly typed static programming language with lazy evaluation it's perfectly probable for the compiler to figure out whether an ampersand refers to the the address of operator or the bitwise AND operator depending upon the types of the operands irrespective of its fixity. For example if x was an integer then x & "abc" would be evaluated as &x "abc", x & 2 would be evaluated as a bitwise AND, and (x &) 2 would be evaluated as &x 2. Fixity of the operand can be made available as an implicit argument to the operator and so pre/post ++ and -- is possible. =) |
|
Mar 8 |
comment |
How would you describe an operator which has no fixity? @camelbrush - "ambigfix" is a little uncouth to pronounce. Simply "ambifix" is good. How about "mixity" instead of "fixity"? Perhaps "mixfix". |
|
Mar 8 |
comment |
How would you describe an operator which has no fixity? @Mitch - Fixity of operators does not matter as long as the precedence and associativity of each operator is known. Arity also does not matter as you may use currying to convert an n-ary operator into a unary operator. Then you can use Djikstra's Shunting Yard algorithm to evaluate the expression unambiguously - even if the operators have different fixities. You'll need to maintain two stacks - one for operands and one for the operators. Currying allows partial application of functions. |
|
Mar 8 |
comment |
How would you describe an operator which has no fixity? @coleopterist - No, I already read the programmers stackexchange site FAQ. It doesn't belong to it. English Language & Usage was the most appropriate. |
|
Mar 8 |
asked | How would you describe an operator which has no fixity? |
|
Jan 25 |
awarded | Student |
|
Jan 25 |
accepted | Antonyms of “lesser” and “greater” |
|
Jan 24 |
awarded | Scholar |
|
Jan 24 |
awarded | Supporter |
|
Jan 24 |
comment |
Antonyms of “lesser” and “greater” True, but I want the quantitative antonyms of "lesser" and "greater" - if they exist. |
|
Jan 24 |
comment |
Antonyms of “lesser” and “greater” @EdwinAshworth - You're correct. I'm asking for the quantifier usage of "lesser" and "greater", not the adjective or adjective-as-a-noun usage. That's what I'm looking for, and that's pretty clear to me. =) |
|
Jan 24 |
asked | Antonyms of “lesser” and “greater” |
|
Jan 24 |
awarded | Autobiographer |
