{"issue":{"state":"open","pull_request":{"diff_url":null,"html_url":null,"patch_url":null},"user":{"avatar_url":"https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/6f256d610f74892652a0b5f9dd0a2c0d?d=https://a248.e.akamai.net/assets.github.com%2Fimages%2Fgravatars%2Fgravatar-140.png","gravatar_id":"6f256d610f74892652a0b5f9dd0a2c0d","url":"https://api.github.com/users/nandykins","login":"nandykins","id":1149047},"milestone":null,"assignee":null,"labels":[],"updated_at":"2011-11-03T03:15:01Z","comments":2,"closed_at":null,"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/nandykins/-g-pl/issues/9","body":"Should we implement an operator table (eg. fixivity and associativity), or should we just leave everything as functions?\r\n\r\nThe advantage of functions: Very easy to implement, very easy to parse with existing rules\r\nThe advantage of operators: Easier to understand for non-lispers and newcomers\r\n\r\nFunctions could look like:\r\n\r\n```\r\n>mfw >mul 3 >add 2 5\r\n```\r\n\r\nInfix could look like:\r\n\r\n```\r\n>mfw 3 * (2 + 5)\r\n```","html_url":"https://github.com/nandykins/-g-pl/issues/9","number":9,"title":"Infix Operators vs Functions","id":2127928,"created_at":"2011-11-02T23:42:41Z"},"action":"created","comment":{"user":{"avatar_url":"https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/b1bfd1459f03e9f62f2398d55078de31?d=https://a248.e.akamai.net/assets.github.com%2Fimages%2Fgravatars%2Fgravatar-140.png","gravatar_id":"b1bfd1459f03e9f62f2398d55078de31","url":"https://api.github.com/users/yate","login":"yate","id":726758},"updated_at":"2011-11-03T03:15:01Z","url":"https://api.github.com/repos/nandykins/-g-pl/issues/comments/2612820","body":"grouping, precedence, and associativity should take care of themselves if we write the parser and define the language correctly.  Then again functional style may work better as part of the esoteric feel.  ","id":2612820,"created_at":"2011-11-03T03:15:01Z"}}