This is not at all obvious.
Obviously, I (usually) would not want to write things like
+
*
a
b
*
c
d
+
a * b
c * d
(a * b) + (c * d)
I have more important things to think about in my code than when I switch between two dialects of the language.
Especially since I get no extra expressive power by doing so.
>Obviously, I (usually) would not want to write things like
Or just use (+ (* a b) (* c d)) which is simpler that any of the example above. Then I can chose between any of:
( +
(* a b)
(* c d))
( +
( *
a
b
)
( *
c
d
)
)
>As the border between these can be fluid, where you choose the cutoff will depend on the situation and also be fluid.
It's only fluid because you've had XX years of infix notation caused brain damage to make you think that.
Granted. The example I gave was just to demonstrate that switching between the styles is not a problem and can be fluid, if you need it to be.
> It's only fluid because you've had XX years of infix notation caused brain damage to make you think that.
No, infix is just easier to read and understand, it matches up better with the hardware in our brains for language. If that is different for you, well ... you mentioned brain damage first.
That's the exact same flexibility but in a different order. It's not simpler.