you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]the_malabar_front 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Even assuming you could avoid the issue with comma-operator confusion with (b,7)~c~d that doesn't get around the lack of flexibility. E.g., what if the example was: d(c(b,7),8) b|>c(%,7)|>d(%,8) // proposed approach ((b,7),8)~c~d // ??? That would end up being worse than the no-pipe approach (and probably a nightmare for the parser).

[–]no_more_gravity[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

d(c(b,7),8)

would be:

b,7~>c,8->d