Rant after trying Rust a bit (page 36)

On Thursday, 6 August 2015 at 06:50:38 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: > On 8/2/2015 8:17 PM, Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= <ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang@gmail.com> wrote: > > It's a weird thing to do for a C-decendant as I would expect > "~=" to do binary > > negation. > > If you really felt this way, you'd expect the C != operator > > a != b > > to be the same as: > > a = !b I don't because "!=" is frequently used and usually in a context where expectations points towards comparison and not assignment. But I would prefer "=", "≠","<" and "≤" for comparison and constants... then have something else for variable assignment.

On Thursday, 6 August 2015 at 11:26:10 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: > On Thursday, 6 August 2015 at 06:50:38 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: >> On 8/2/2015 8:17 PM, Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= <ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang@gmail.com> wrote: >> > It's a weird thing to do for a C-decendant as I would expect >> "~=" to do binary >> > negation. >> >> If you really felt this way, you'd expect the C != operator >> >> a != b >> >> to be the same as: >> >> a = !b > > I don't because "!=" is frequently used and usually in a context where expectations points towards comparison and not assignment. > > But I would prefer "=", "≠","<" and "≤" for comparison and constants... then have something else for variable assignment. I understand your attempt to auction your old APL keyboard didn't go well?

On Thursday, 6 August 2015 at 11:30:45 UTC, Idan Arye wrote: > I understand your attempt to auction your old APL keyboard didn't go well? There is no good reason to avoid unicode operators these days. A language without a dedicated editor-mode is pretty much DOA.

On Thursday, 6 August 2015 at 12:33:33 UTC, Kagamin wrote: > On Thursday, 6 August 2015 at 11:33:29 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: >> DOA. > > http://www.acronymfinder.com/DOA.html (Degenerate Overclockers Anonymous?) http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=DOA Without this great site it would often be hard to understand what people from USA are talking about.

On Thursday, 6 August 2015 at 11:30:45 UTC, Idan Arye wrote: > On Thursday, 6 August 2015 at 11:26:10 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: >> On Thursday, 6 August 2015 at 06:50:38 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: >>> On 8/2/2015 8:17 PM, Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= <ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > [...] >>> "~=" to do binary >>> > [...] >>> >>> If you really felt this way, you'd expect the C != operator >>> >>> a != b >>> >>> to be the same as: >>> >>> a = !b >> >> I don't because "!=" is frequently used and usually in a context where expectations points towards comparison and not assignment. >> >> But I would prefer "=", "≠","<" and "≤" for comparison and constants... then have something else for variable assignment. > > I understand your attempt to auction your old APL keyboard didn't go well? Compose keys have existed for a long time. The aversion to unicode is ridiculous.

On 08/06/2015 01:30 PM, Idan Arye wrote: > On Thursday, 6 August 2015 at 11:26:10 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: >> On Thursday, 6 August 2015 at 06:50:38 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: >>> On 8/2/2015 8:17 PM, Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= >>> <ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > It's a weird thing to do for a C-decendant as I would expect >>> "~=" to do binary >>> > negation. >>> >>> If you really felt this way, you'd expect the C != operator >>> >>> a != b >>> >>> to be the same as: >>> >>> a = !b >> >> I don't because "!=" is frequently used and usually in a context where >> expectations points towards comparison and not assignment. >> >> But I would prefer "=", "≠","<" and "≤" for comparison and >> constants... then have something else for variable assignment. > > I understand your attempt to auction your old APL keyboard didn't go well? I can actually type ≠ and ≤ more quickly than != or <= in my editor.

August 06, 2015

Re: Rant after trying Rust a bit

Posted by Chris
in reply to rsw0x

Permalink

Chris

Posted in reply to rsw0x

Permalink

On Thursday, 6 August 2015 at 12:56:05 UTC, rsw0x wrote:
> On Thursday, 6 August 2015 at 11:30:45 UTC, Idan Arye wrote:
>> On Thursday, 6 August 2015 at 11:26:10 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
>>> On Thursday, 6 August 2015 at 06:50:38 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>>>> On 8/2/2015 8:17 PM, Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= <ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > [...]
>>>> "~=" to do binary
>>>> > [...]
>>>>
>>>> If you really felt this way, you'd expect the C != operator
>>>>
>>>>   a != b
>>>>
>>>> to be the same as:
>>>>
>>>>   a = !b
>>>
>>> I don't because "!=" is frequently used and usually in a context where expectations points towards comparison and not assignment.
>>>
>>> But I would prefer "=", "≠","<" and "≤" for comparison and constants... then have something else for variable assignment.
>>
>> I understand your attempt to auction your old APL keyboard didn't go well?
>
> Compose keys have existed for a long time.
> The aversion to unicode is ridiculous.

That's because everything in IT is Anglo-centric (mainly US). To this day we suffer from the fact that nobody in the English speaking world bothered to cater for "special characters"[1], when computers and programming languages emerged as ever more important.

[1] the term "special character" tells a lot about the attitude. For French or Portuguese speakers "ç" is not a "special character" nor is "ñ" for Spanish speakers (not to mention other writing systems!).

On Thursday, 6 August 2015 at 11:26:10 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: > But I would prefer "=", "≠","<" and "≤" for comparison and constants... then have something else for variable assignment. :=, or ≔

Forums