Peter Haworth wrote:
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 15:31:24 -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
Meaning that the list:
+^ - force to numeric context, complement
~^ - force to string context, complement
simply becomes:
^ - complement (type-specific)
Does this include booleans? I really liked the idea that not and xor were
just the same operator, but unary/binary. Otherwise, we have ! for boolean
negation only, while ^ does the same thing for other types, as well as xor
for everything. I don't mind leaving ! in as a synonym.
Perhaps C<!> is just a (preferred) synonym for C<?^>.
Which suggests:
Unary:
^ X eval X in scalar context, then bitwise complement polymorphically
~^ X eval X in string context, then bitwise complement chars
+^ X eval X in numeric context, then bitwise complement number
?^ X eval X in boolean context, then bitwise complement bit
! X eval X in boolean context, then bitwise complement bit (preferred form)
Binary Junctive:
X ^ Y eval X and Y in scalar context and form their exjunction
X ~^ Y eval X and Y in string context and form their exjunction
X +^ Y eval X and Y in numeric context and form their exjunction
X ?^ Y eval X and Y in boolean context and form their exjunction
X ! Y eval X and Y in boolean context and form their exjunction
Binary Bitwise:
X .^ Y eval X and Y in scalar context and form their polymorphic bitwise XOR
X ~.^ Y eval X and Y in string context and form their charwise bitwise XOR
X +.^ Y eval X and Y in numeric context and form their bitwise XOR
Binary Logical:
X ?^^ Y eval X and Y in boolean context and compute their XOR
X !! Y eval X and Y in boolean context and compute their XOR (preferred form)
In other words:
Unary: ^
Junctive: ^
Bitwise: .^
Logical: ?^^
String contextualizer prefix: ~
Numeric contextualizer prefix: +
Boolean contextualizer prefix: ?
Synonym for unary and binary ?^: !
Synonym for binary ?^^: !!
Incidentally, that leaves C<^> free to be the unambiguous vectorizing prefix
(modulo the C<^+=> ambiguity). I still vastly prefer C<»op«> though.
Damian
