re: operator precedence

[CJ FINE <cbmvax!uunet!bradford.ac.uk!C.J.Fine>]

If you skamygernycertu are willing to do the kludge you've described,
I'd say, go ahead and do it.

Seriously though, I think it is important to keep the following three
things separate:
        The complexity of the grammar (ie how complex it is to define)
        How difficult it is (for people) to use
        How difficult it is for le minde belo skami to implement.

The last should not deter is if the others are OK - and the middle one
is the most important one. I think your suggestion will work quite
easily for use, so if you are prepared to implement it, go for it.

(I would prefer to find a way of indicating the levels by something
other than numbers, because I think it is preferable to regard
precedences as an ordering, not a set of values, and numbers tend to
make people think in terms of values. What I mean is that if mu'a "pi'i"
gets assigned to VUhU5, that people will think of precedence = 5, as if
that were a definite number, whereas all we mean is that it is above
VUhU4 and below VUhU6.
 How about adapting the vi/va/vu plan, now used in at least 8 different
selma'o, and calling them VUhUVIVI to VUhUVUVU or something?  zo'oru'e)

                        kolin