[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Followup on mekso question
- To: John Cowan <cowan@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>, Eric Raymond <eric@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>, Eric Tiedemann <est@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>
- Subject: Followup on mekso question
- From: John Cowan <cbmvax!snark.thyrsus.com!cowan>
- Reply-To: John Cowan <cbmvax!snark.thyrsus.com!cowan>
- Sender: Lojban list <cbmvax!uunet!CUVMA.BITNET!pucc.Princeton.EDU!LOJBAN>
Well, it's early days yet, but I wanted to interrupt a rash of postings about
Polish and reverse Polish notation.
Yes, Lojban has them!
No, they aren't affected by this proposal.
No, they aren't sufficient in themselves. Lojban tries to make mathematics
speakable, not to reform it. It's quite enough of a job to "reform" ordinary
language habits.
So my proposal for operator priorities relates solely to Lojban's infix
notation.
--
cowan@snark.thyrsus.com ...!uunet!cbmvax!snark!cowan
e'osai ko sarji la lojban