January 21, 2005 Re: What is the difference between 'is' and '==='? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Anders F Björklund | Anders F Björklund wrote:
> Do you actually read your programs out loud ? Haven't done that since
> I went to school
It's not just the students. Teachers have to speak too.
|
January 21, 2005 Re: What is the difference between 'is' and '==='? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Anders F Björklund | Anders F Björklund wrote: <snip> > But "is" and "in" are plenty. Perhaps "is!" and "!in" could work. "is!" would potentially break existing code. Stewart. -- My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox. Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit. |
January 21, 2005 Re: What is the difference between 'is' and '==='? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Georg Wrede | Georg Wrede wrote: >> Do you actually read your programs out loud ? >> Haven't done that since I went to school > > It's not just the students. Teachers have to speak too. Guess I have been at the computer for too long then, nowadays I mostly communicate through email. Or CVS ;-) But usually we spoke about design, and then coded the details. I don't recall long sessions or reading/writing such signs, or maybe it was just because I skipped those. Or maybe because they were in a different language anyway ? Seems I'll still have trouble coding in my native tongue: > void anders() {} > void björklund() {} > > void main() > { > anders(); > björklund(); > } dmd anders.d [8] > /var/tmp//cclIBzkT.s:44:Invalid mnemonic '¶rklundFZv' So I think I will stick with abstract math symbols, thank you. :) And using English for communication such as this, and comments. But if '!==' is now deprecated, then TOKnotidentity should have some kind of new token shouldn't it ? Then again there is no TOKnotin... (in dmd/src/dmd/lexer.c and lexer.h, that is; The DMD source code) Could be since "in" returns a pointer and not a bit, these days ? But this construct is pretty common: "assert (foo !== null);" If that is soon deprecated, it needs some kind of replacement ? I know that Walter will suggest "assert(foo)", so I'll drop it. --anders PS. Had the computer read it to me. It *was* funny! (App > Services > Speech > Start Speaking Text) |
January 21, 2005 Re: What is the difference between 'is' and '==='? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Walter | "Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:cspa3k$v95$2@digitaldaemon.com... > > "nail" <nail_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:cson1b$5f6$1@digitaldaemon.com... >> >> >PS. >> >I still think that we need 'isnt' for '!==' >> >> In this case isnt must be :) >> >> What about future? Does === will become deprecated? > > Yes, use "is" from now on. The === turned out to be a problem distinguishing from == with some fonts. So're we getting an 'isnt'? if(!(x is null)) is never going to be an attractive form |
January 21, 2005 Re: What is the difference between 'is' and '==='? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Paul Bonser | "Paul Bonser" <misterpib@gmail.com> wrote in message news:cspjj1$1agb$1@digitaldaemon.com... > Vathix wrote: >> On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 23:50:43 +0100, Anders F Björklund <afb@algonet.se> wrote: >> >>> Paul Bonser wrote: >>> >>>> I must have had a good English teacher in high school, because such things pain me. (As well as its-it's their-there-they're to-too and a lot (the only proper way is a lot, two separate words, not one)...but I guess I'm a bit obsessive compulsive, too...) >>> >>> >>> I guess you're not in favor of an "aint" keyword then ? :-) >>> >>> Or maybe it should use "p is not null", just like in SQL... >>> >>> Oh, well: !(p is null) >>> >>> --anders >> >> >> I like the previously mentioned "p !is null". Would also work with "in", "key !in aa". > > I'm not actually opposed to using isnt, I'd just have a hard time for a while typing it without the "'"...isnot would work, too. isnot is better |
January 21, 2005 Re: What is the difference between 'is' and '==='? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Matthew | Matthew wrote:
> if(!(x is null))
>
> is never going to be an attractive form
Until there are booleans in D, you can use:
if(x)
--anders
|
January 21, 2005 Re: What is the difference between 'is' and '==='? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Anders F Björklund | "Anders F Björklund" <afb@algonet.se> wrote in message news:csqnjr$2hv2$1@digitaldaemon.com... > Matthew wrote: > >> if(!(x is null)) >> >> is never going to be an attractive form > > Until there are booleans in D, you can use: > > if(x) I'm afraid I never write a non-boolean conditional (sub-)expression, so you won't catch me doing that. ;) |
January 21, 2005 Re: What is the difference between 'is' and '==='? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Matthew | > isnot is better
and "notin"?
L.
|
January 21, 2005 Re: What is the difference between 'is' and '==='? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Lionello Lunesu | Lionello Lunesu wrote: >>isnot is better > > and "notin"? Since the "InExpression" is not boolean anymore, http://www.digitalmars.com/d/expression.html#InExpression there is no need for any "notin" or "out" version ? See http://www.digitalmars.com/d/arrays.html#associative : > The InExpression yields a pointer to the value if > the key is in the associative array, or null if not: > > int* p; > p = ("hello" in b); > if (p != null) And since p is a pointer, it can use == and != checks... (had p been a reference, that would call opEquals(null)) You can still use the non-boolean shorthand versions: if ("key" in hashtable) and if (!("key" in hashtable)) But the return type is now a pointer, and not an int. http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html#new0107 --anders |
January 21, 2005 Re: What is the difference between 'is' and '==='? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Georg Wrede | Georg Wrede wrote:
> I ignored it, since the main point was kind of obvious. :-)
>
> In my mother tongue "at most" is just one word, as is "at least". My gripe is actually the pronunciation of "<=" as "less than or equal to", in all spoken languages. It sounds clumsy and overly technical, especially as it refers to a single operator, or concept, more than a combination of two.
>
> Back to the original point, I like "isnt". It should be perfectly ok since nobody seems to have a problem with "endif". We might use "isnot", but "isnt" feels nicer.
As an English speaker, "isnt" feels very informal. I doesn't (!) quite feel correct to use informal English contractions in a computer language.
|
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation