On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Ed Peschko wrote: > Michael Lazarro wrote: > > > 1) Need a definite syntax for hypers > > ^[op] and <<op>> > > have been most seriously proposed -- something that keeps a > > bracketed syntax, but solves ambiguity issues. > > hm. What was wrong with just '^' again? Reading the threads, it seems to have > gotten lost in the shuffle.
Personally, I would like to see us come full circle back to just ^ again too. The main problem seems to be that we want ^ and ^^ for xor-ing things, so ^^ could be either a logical-xor or a vector-one-superposition. So what if we just made the [] optional? Then all the original hyper/vector documentation is still valid. (The meanings of ^+ ^|| ^<<= etc are all non-ambiguous.) For the ambiguous case, ^^ is logical-xor because it is used more often, and vector-one-superposition is unambiguously ^[^] . ~ John Williams
