Re: are there user defined infix operators?

[Uxio Prego]

> You cannot use Bison to resolve dynamically your precedence if
> you have a free set of levels. But if you have a fixed number
> of level, say 10, [...]

Fixed number seems perfectly enough to me.

> you could define ten tokens for each level,
> map each operator to the corresponding level, storing the actual
> operator as a semantic value. The scanner could use a map for
> instance to decide to which token you map each operator.
> 
> That wouldn't be of much help if you also want to play with
> associativity. Maybe using even more tokens to denote the different
> possibilities.

I didn't understand all of this at first, but after reading the Hans
example too, I think I understand every part of this now. Thank you!

I'm not going to exploit this right now, but I rest assured to know
a way to explore if I ever need to get there.