Why is there no or or and ?
a at a.a
Fri Feb 17 06:58:06 PST 2012
"F i L" <witte2008 at gmail.com> wrote in message
news:jzkatvnibtjkcafqsibf at forum.dlang.org...
>> All of the syntaxes you're advocating are every bit as arbitrary as the
>> ones you're against.
> Programming is logic largely based around math.
Yes, it's *based* around math, but it *isn't* math.
English is based largely around German and Latin, and yet it's neither
German nor Latin, nor a mere conjunction of them, nor can one say that it
*should* be. Of course, you can pick that analogy to death, but the point
is, things don't have to maintain a heavy resemblance to their origin.
> Seeing as how we're all educated around with mathematic symbols as
> children, a language design which reflects what is most familiar will be
> the easiest to initially understand. Less friction means more
You're talking about very minor details that are trivial to learn (I was
only about 12 or 13 when I learned C). The prodictivity drop in these cases
is *purely* a *minor* upfront cost, and with no ongoing cost (but does have
ongoing *benefits* because it's designed specifically with *it's own* domain
in mind instead being hampered by unnecessary ties to some other domain).
More information about the Digitalmars-d