Re: Re: [vote] pow-operator

Hi Kris, On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 8:35 AM, Kris Craig <kris.craig@gmail.com> wrote: > >> That said, if there are other reasons for voting 'no' besides >> associativity, feel free to shoot me an email or discuss it on the list. >> > > What did it for me was the lower precedence for the unary minus. I don't > want to have another language that thinks a negative number squared is a > negative number. I understand and respect your reasoning as outlined in > the RFC, but this is a deal-breaker for me. > I've had a short discussion with Anthony about this and he convinced me that I was indeed wrong about my "unary minus" reasoning; therefore I have updated the RFC to reflect that. So: echo -3 ** 2; // 9 echo 1 - 3 ** 2; // -8 The unary minus is now at the same level as [, the array dereferencing operator. > > --Kris > > -- -- Tjerk