Precedence of logical operators about ruler HOT 4 CLOSED

Hello and thank you for the detailed bug report!

Here is my try:

$ hoa compiler:pp hoa://Library/Ruler/Grammar.pp <( echo 'a and b or c' ) -v dump
>  #expression
>  >  #and
>  >  >  token(identifier, a)
>  >  >  #or
>  >  >  >  token(identifier, b)
>  >  >  >  token(identifier, c)

I guess the tree should look like this:

$ hoa compiler:pp hoa://Library/Ruler/Grammar.pp <( echo '(a and b) or c' ) -v dump
>  #expression
>  >  #or
>  >  >  #and
>  >  >  >  token(identifier, a)
>  >  >  >  token(identifier, b)
>  >  >  token(identifier, c)

So in our implementation, logical operators are right-associatives, whilst they are commonly left-associatives.

from ruler.

Thank you for your reply.

In my eyes the problem isn't a question about left- or right-assiociatives. You can see that if you include my $rule3 in your inspections.

Either way (left- or right-assiociating), $rule2 and $rule3 will yield complementary results whilst they should be identical!

IMO operators must be set in relation to each other to achieve precedence. However I understand that with the current architecture this is far away from trivial.

Actually, I stumbled along this issue will thinking about how to implement new operators + and *, which need the same precedence...

from ruler.

@Pittiplatsch I am really really really sorry for the too late reply… I have finally time to work back on issues on Hoa. Excuse me. A PR has been proposed, see #107 please. Your feedback is valuable.

from ruler.

I'm still unsure about the right vs. left association thingy...
However, dividing the grammar into separate OR / AND pieces looks reasonable, as does your unit test, which exactly mirrors my test cases.
Thank you for fixing :-)

from ruler.