Unicode operators

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

Bill Baxter wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 10:16 AM, Bent Rasmussen
> <IncredibleShrinkingSphere at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Agreed.
>>
>> As an example: what domain does not include boolean expressions? And how
>> many domains include vector and matrix operations? Quite many.
> 
>> It would be a massive boost for readability in those domains (and in all
>> domains, with boolean expressions).
> 
> I don't know about you, but to me 'and' and 'or' make for much more
> readable boolean expressions than the standard mathematical symbols ^
> and v.  Heck, && and || are more readable to me than the math symbols.

Hm, in my experimental emacs shenanigans I had && displayed as a wedge 
and || displayed as a vee and heck do they look good.

>> The problem is not the operators themselves; a language does not loose
>> anything by extension, it is how exactly to best arrive at the goal of
>> having the code look nice and readable with those operators.
>>
>> - Bent
>>
>> Hm, anyone fancy the |> operator?
> 
> What would that mean?

Ironic smile with eyes closed.


Andrei