Re: Aliasing separators (Re: grammar triviality with '&&')

[Ray Andrews <rayandrews@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 03/07/2015 07:52 AM, Peter Stephenson wrote:
> If you did make that change, making "&&" a string rather than a token 
> at the start of the line, then you could alias it willy-nilly. So I 
> still don't really see it as relevant to the behaviour of tokens. I 
> suspect I'm not explaining this point properly. pws 

As for me, I didn't realize I'd be guilty of being a party to the 
creation of an ouroboros.
Can it even be contemplated to make fundamental syntax aliasable? Can I 
alias
a backtick?  Can I alias the word alias?  Not on this side of sanity.  I 
dunno, maybe
what you guys are contemplating makes sense, but it sure looks like the 
time-traveler's
paradox to me. Allowing syntax to change it's own meaning?  Is there 
anywhere in this
universe where aliasing '&&' is useful, even if it didn't create 
paradox?  I myself am
happy with Bart's last explanation, it's robust, understandable, 
necessary, fundamental.

[ -e file1 ]\
&& do-this

isn't hard to type.  Pandora, meet Kurt Godel, meet Doctor Who.

Lawrence, forgive me ;-)