Exponential operator

[Miles]

Don wrote:
> You didn't respond to my assertion: even if you _could_ do it, why would
> you want to? ** sucks as an exponential operator. I dispute the
> contention that ** is a natural choice. It comes from the same language
> that brought you  IF X .NE. 2

There are too many languages that support ** as an exponentiation
operator, that is the reason ** is a likely candidate. Your reasoning
seemed to be:

- Fortran is bad;
- Fortran had ** as its exponentiation operator;
- So, ** is bad as an exponentiation operator.

I don't care for ** or .NE., really. I don't like * as a multiplication
operator, in fact. I'd rather have × as multiplication, ↑ as
exponentiation, ∧ as logical and, ∨ as logical or, ¬ as a logical not, =
as equality, ≠ as inequality and ← as assignment.

I don't know why, but every time I say this, it brings all sorts of
controversies and euphoric reactions.