Christoph Zwerschke wrote:
> Juho Schultz wrote:
>
>> Fortran 90 allowed >, >= instead of .GT., .GE. of Fortran 77. But F90
>> uses ! as comment symbol and therefore need /= instead of != for
>> inequality. I guess just because they wanted. However, it is one more
>> needless detail to remember. Same with the suggested operators.
>
>
> The point is that it is just *not* the same. The suggested operators are
> universal symbols (unicode). Nobody would use ≠ as a comment sign. No
> need to remember was it .NE. or -ne or <> or != or /= ...
>
> There is also this old dispute of using "=" for both the assignment
> operator and equality and how it can confuse newcomers and cause errors.
> A consequent use of unicode could solve this problem:
>
Being involved in the discussion about assignment and looking for new
terms which do not cause confusion when explaining what assignment does,
this proposal seems to be a kind of solution:
> a ← b # Assignment (now "a = b" in Python, a := b in Pascal)
^-- this seems to me to be still open for further proposals and
discussion. There is no symbol coming to my mind, but I would be glad if
it would express, that 'a' becomes a reference to a Python object being
currently referred by the identifier 'b' (maybe some kind of <-> ?).
> a = b # Eqality (now "a == b" in Python, a = b in Pascal)
> a ≡ b # Identity (now "a is b" in Python, @a = @b in Pascal)
> a ≈ b # Approximately equal (may be interesting for floats)
^-- this three seem to me to be obvious and don't need to be
further discussed (only implemented as the time for such things will come).
Claudio
>
> (I know this goes one step further as it is incompatible to the existing
> use of the = sign in Python).
>
> Another aspect: Supporting such symbols would also be in accord with
> Python's trait of being "executable pseudo code."
>
> -- Christoph
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
