User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0)
            Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <539432A6.7030205@clear.net.nz> <5395A7A3.7040106@residenset.net>  
            <5395AA02.8040704@morningstar2.co.uk>
            <CANQYN6x3K5LzThY49V2CYuDj0i6O=M1CJgby9YdS4J6ZDY5UTA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <53BF8686.2060201@morningstar2.co.uk>
Date:         Fri, 11 Jul 2014 07:39:02 +0100
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
From: Joseph Wright <joseph.wright@MORNINGSTAR2.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Juxtaposition in l3fp
To: LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE
In-Reply-To:  <CANQYN6x3K5LzThY49V2CYuDj0i6O=M1CJgby9YdS4J6ZDY5UTA@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: list
Envelope-To: <rainer.schoepf@GMX.NET>
Status: R

On 11/07/2014 00:20, Bruno Le Floch wrote:
> I'm keen on leaving juxtaposition = multiplication, because that
> allows to use dimensionful numbers directly inside fp expressions (pt,
> in, ... are defined as floating point constants).  I believe that we
> should change the precedence of juxtaposition-as-multiplication from
> what it currently is (the tightest) to being the same as
> multiplication.  In other words, juxtaposition would behave exactly
> identically to adding an asterisk.

To be clear, continue to allow

  2x + 1
  2pt + 3cm

but with

  2x^2 + 2 = 2*(x^2) + 2

so for your example 25pc^2 requiring braces (0.25pc)^2?

> Would that make sense?  Am I missing something crucial (probably... I
> didn't realize when allowing juxtaposition what a mess I was
> creating)?

Seems OK to me (if I've understood correctly).
-- 
Joseph Wright