From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Daniel Brockman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Calc: `*' binds more strongly than `/' Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 18:00:48 +0200 Message-ID: <87r6q786rz.fsf@wigwam.brockman.se> References: <87y7kvxj6p.fsf@arcor.de> <87odlrkn74.fsf@truman.edu> <87tzvhcul9.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <863b2z2mma.fsf@blue.stonehenge.com> <87abx6u905.fsf@truman.edu> <873b2xz6t9.fsf@totally-fudged-out-message-id> <87y7kpax45.fsf@wigwam.brockman.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1177603979 6396 80.91.229.12 (26 Apr 2007 16:12:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 16:12:59 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Apr 26 18:12:57 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Hh6aS-0006HZ-KR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 18:12:52 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Hh6gC-0003My-HJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 12:18:48 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Hh6V9-0005v6-K7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 12:07:23 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Hh6V8-0005u5-Pi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 12:07:23 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Hh6V8-0005tn-88 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 12:07:22 -0400 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Hh6PM-000246-VL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 12:01:25 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Hh6P5-00045t-FY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 18:01:07 +0200 Original-Received: from c-b1fee255.09-32-6c6b7013.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se ([85.226.254.177]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 18:01:07 +0200 Original-Received: from daniel by c-b1fee255.09-32-6c6b7013.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 18:01:07 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 67 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-b1fee255.09-32-6c6b7013.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se X-Face: :&2UWGm>e24)ip~'K@iOsA&JT3JX*v@1-#L)=dUb825\Fwg#`^N!Y*g-TqdS AevzjFJe96f@V'ya8${57/T'"mTd`1o{TGYhHnVucLq!D$r2O{IN)7>.0op_Y`%r;/Q +(]`3F-t10N7NF\.Mm0q}p1:%iqTi:5]1E]rDF)R$9.!,Eu'9K':y9^U3F8UCS1M+A$ 8[[[WT^`$P[vu>P+8]aQMh9giu&fPCqLW2FSsGs User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.92 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:zlpqZS/M8BIBjrBnFtQ/Ng5AI2o= X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:70195 Archived-At: Christian Schlauer writes: > I don't have to think about such things /at all/ in /all > other programs/ I use, because they use the common syntax, > and I don't see the benefit of Emacs having its own rules. Well, Emacs is better than all other programs in _many_ ways. :-) > What do you win with that convenient behaviour compared to that it > confuses people that also use other, more common spreadsheets [...]? Apart from saving keystrokes, we'll provide good notation that lets users type mathematical expressions involving fractions more like the way they normally think about them. There is a reason why mathematicians write A B --- C D instead of A B / (C D). Stefan's suggestion that `A / B C' and `A / B * C' mean different things is interesting, however. >> (You could make the same argument for `+' and `-' --- i.e., >> that `A-B+C' should mean `A-(B+C)'. However, this is not as >> natural because one usually does not think of sums as units. >> Writing `A-B-C' is completely natural, but `A/B/C' is not >> completely natural --- in fact, it is a little confusing.) > > Here I don't follow you -- except for that you can write `A/B/C' in > Calc or any other software, and you will get the same result > *everywhere*, even in Calc. (But I wouldn't write it that way either.) I was just pointing out that `/' and `-' are different beasts (anticipating an argument that they should work analoguously). >> I think this is good notation, but I also think that it >> would be a good idea to warn the user and make sure that >> they know what they are doing when entering such things. > > I fully agree with Stefan: > > | In any case, I still haven't heard any concrete reason > | why the non-standard behavior of calc is preferred to > | the more common behavior. I have presented at least one concrete reason. (See above.) > | Neither is perfect because there is no such thing, There is such a thing as `better', though. > | but one of them is sufficiently surprising to deserve > | big warnings in the Calc doc and the Org doc, whereas > | the other would be "business as usual". Granted. I think the feature is worth the warnings. -- Daniel Brockman