[E-Lang] Operator expansion names, Part 1: Intro

[zooko@zooko.com]

 MarkM wrote:
>
> This is violated by both 
> 
>     [1, 2] + [3, 4] -> [1, 2, [3, 4]]
> 
> and
> 
>     'a' + 3 -> 'd'
> 
> However, the first violation just bothers me in ways the second one doesn't. 
> The point is not to revisit this controversy, but to point out that, prior 
> to seeing these two violations, I would not have been able to think to state 
> correctness criteria that would have prohibited the first while allowing the 
> second.  I think it must be this way.

I don't know if mere announcement of syntactic tastes are welcome at this point,
but I am bothered by both of these.

I do very much like the formal implications of a `+' operator that you
mentioned: closure, associativity.  Optionally the existence of an additive
identity but that one isn't a big deal to me.

Regards,

Zooko