Pow operator precedence

[Mehrdad]

On 1/13/2012 5:39 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 1/13/2012 11:25 AM, Manu wrote:
>> Fair call. I buy this argument. If there is a precedent set by 
>> (multiple) other
>> languages towards this precedence (and none against), then so be it.
>> If there were a vote though, I'd vote for it being deprecated on 
>> grounds of
>> offering nothing to the language more than confusion.
>
> I suspect that pow may be better off as a compiler intrinsic.
I posted this once but it seemed to go ignored, so I'll post again ;)

I think a WARNING is the best route.
Kind of like when VC++ cries in pain when you say something like "a << b 
+ c": http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/5d2e57c5.aspx