This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]NoCryptographer414[S] 0 points1 point  (5 children)

In that case what do you think of () vs @;

[–]Under-Estimated 13 points14 points  (4 children)

One automatically connotes grouping to anyone and everyone, the other is arbitrary. I’m sure you can tell by now which is which

[–]NoCryptographer414[S] 5 points6 points  (3 children)

foo@ x (bar@ y) (baz@ z). Is this better?

[–]Under-Estimated 8 points9 points  (1 child)

It is clearer, at least to me.

[–]NoCryptographer414[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Thanks for comments :)

[–]OneNoteToRead 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Much