Why is there no or or and ?

bcs bcs at example.com
Thu Feb 16 22:09:55 PST 2012

On 02/16/2012 09:16 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Jonathan M Davis"<jmdavisProg at gmx.com>  wrote in message
> news:mailman.450.1329455016.20196.digitalmars-d at puremagic.com...
>> Seriously?&&  and || are _way_ more readible, because they're obviously
>> not
>> functions or variables. It's immediately obvious what the operators are
>> when
>> scanning code. That's not the case when the operators are words instead of
>> symbols. I'm certain that you'd have quite a few programmers up in arms if
>> you
>> tried to change&&  to "and" and || to "or." And having multiple operators
>> which do exactly the same thing is a horrible idea which reduces code
>> readibility. So, even adding them as alternate options is a really bad
>> idea
>> IMHO.
>> I'm surprised that anyone would think that and was better than&&.
> This is why I think people are nuts when they claim that english-like
> VB-style syntax is more readable than C-style.
> (Yea, to a grandmother with zero programming experience english-like
> languages are more readable. For a programmer it's worse becase code !=
> english.)

Any language that is designed to be easy for amateurs to use will be 
used by amateurs, and only by amateurs.

Yes, avoid making the language unnecessarily hard for beginners, but 
don't in any way compromises the language to do so.

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list