http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3481
--- Comment #6 from Don <clugd...@yahoo.com.au> 2009-11-07 22:26:45 PST --- (In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #1) > > I've been wanting an exponentiation operator since the Stone Age, but it > > seemed > > like too small an issue to really make a point about. This is terrific. > > However, can we at least consider making ^ the exponentiation op and moving > > xor > > to ^^? Yes, it breaks C compatibility, but who the heck really uses bitwise > > xor except in really low-level code anyhow? > > Are we going to change around the other bitwise vs. logical operators as well? > > Confusion with the bitwise operators is why I'm against the choice of ^ or ^^ > for exponentiation. Sooner or later, someone's going to expect ^^ to be the > logical xor operator. Logical xor is already in the language, its symbol is !=. > But I don't know what would be a good symbol for it. I'm not sure I've ever > really liked **, aside from the current meanings of those two characters in > sequence. Maybe if only ↑ had remained on keyboards beyond ZX Spectrum > days.... -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------