function application vs. infix operator precedence

[Stephen Weeks]

> I have made my own infix operator (let's say it's called $) that
> takes an int on the left side, an int->int function on the right
> side, and returns a function int->int.
> 
> this works [and is the functionality i am going for]: (1 $ f) 2
> but this doesn't [this is the syntax i want, though]: 1 $ f 2
> 
> i guess f is being applied to 2, which i don't want.
> 
> so is there a way to make the $ bind with a higher precedence than the
> function application?

This question is probably better directed at comp.lang.ml since there
is nothing specific to MLton, but I'll give it a shot.

I don't think there is any way to give an infix operator higher
precedence than application.  The grammar for expressions on page 63
of the Definition includes the productions

exp ::= infexp
      |  ...

infexp ::= appexp
         | infexp vid infexp

appexp ::= atexp
         | appexp atexp

atexp ::= scon | longid | ... | (exp)

Taken together, I take these to mean that the juxtaposition in appexp
binds more tightly than the vid in infexp.  

Hopefully this makes some sense.