[mkl]

> it's intended to minimize foot-guns to lower the error rate when generating Mog code. This is why Mog has no operator precedence: non-associative operations have to use parentheses, e.g. (a + b) * c.

Almost all the code LLMs have been trained on uses operator precedence, so no operator precedence seems like a massive foot-gun.

[NewsaHackO]

I agree. But also, do people rely on operator precedence when coding? I just automatically use parentheses in general.

[Bootvis]

Also for a * b + c ? I know clang tidy wants me to do this but I think it is overkill.

[NewsaHackO]

I would usually. Sometimes if it's like 2 * x + b, I would not, but personally, I hate chasing down bugs like this, so just add it to remove ambiguity. Also, for like b + 2 * a, I will almost always use parentheses.

[disconcision]

> so no operator precedence seems like a massive foot-gun

how do you mean? given that spec, ambiguous code just won't compile. that could potentially be inefficient, but not a foot gun.

[reverius42]

Not sure that matters when the entire language spec is expected to be part of every context window? The LLM should be capable of using the language spec to express intended precedence.