Why is there no or or and ?

Nick Sabalausky 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 
> productivity.

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 mailing list