Unicode operators and precedence?

Dominikus Dittes Scherkl dominikus at scherkl.de
Mon Nov 2 08:30:37 UTC 2020

On Sunday, 1 November 2020 at 21:13:07 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
> I am adding keywords "or", "and" "not" for boolean logic.
Bah. Why?
>> No, they are clearly logic operators and should NOT have set 
>> semantics.
> Well, it depends on what kind of software one writes. You could 
> also view an unsigned int as a vector of bools rather than a 
> set.
Yes, but a vector is still a kind of set (only has much richer 
additional structure), so use set operators on it, not boolean 
logic. Boolean is for only one bit at a time.
I still think replacing & with ∩ and | with ∪ is the best way to 
go, so ∧ can be used instead of && and ∨ instead of ||. No need 
for words and all standard so everybody should know what they 
Also all of them are new, so precedence can be assigned to your 
wishes without braking existing code.
>> Hmm. Maybe you are right - Xor, Nand and Nor are more useful 
>> as additional set operators.
> Nand and nor might be nice to have, not sure if people use them 
> much, but.
How could they, as the language doesn't offer them as operators?
I think in HW design at least Nand is heavily used...

>> Ah, i missed one:
>> ~  --> ∁ (complement)
> I looked at that one, but it is virtually indistinguishable 
> from a regular C.
Ok, at least ~ is there and does not have a bad precedence so no 
urgent need to replace it by something different, although it is 
non-standard (at least for a mathematician).

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list