At 09:47 AM 2/21/2002 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >"Randal L. Schwartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Sam> No, "but" is syntactically equivalent to "and" in English. It >Sam> just implies that the second condition is not generally what >Sam> you'd expect if the first was true. > >Randal> Maybe in the interest of huffman encoding, we could make >Randal> it "even_though". :) > >Or we could compromise on "despite". > >But (sigh) when I first looked at this proposal, I thought, "Now what the >heck is he trying to say that 'and' doesn't cover?" > >Is it really syntactic sugar if it's confusing at first glance?
Syntactic maple syrup? -Melvin
