> On 13 Sep 2018, at 19:00, Akim Demaille <a...@lrde.epita.fr> wrote:
>
>
>
>> Le 13 sept. 2018 à 11:16, Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> a écrit :
>>
>>
>>> On 12 Sep 2018, at 23:45, Frank Heckenbach <f.heckenb...@fh-soft.de> wrote:
>>>
>>> But if there was a more concise syntax, I'd like it. I had
>>> fantasized about a new keyword ("let") or a new syntax (":="), but
>>> if "const" with implied "auto" can simply work, that would be great.
>>> But we're not designing C++ here, I know ...
>>
>> There is Unicode ≔ U+2254 COLON EQUALS if one dares leaving the ASCII range,
>> which in fact I am using in my own language, for definitions and Hoare logic
>> code.
>
> Nice idea, but too small a difference visually with the font I have right
> now.
You might try the STIXFonts, though some typographers say they don't like it.
On the ConTexT list they said that there is project for a monospace math font.
> For definitions, you also have ≝ and ≜.
A decided to use ≔ and ≕ for abbreviations were one side defines the other.
Then ≝ could reserved for implicit definitions. In math, the last one came
first though, and the other two via computing. The other symbol you mention I
do not recall haven seen in math. I usually don't remember the specific details
of the notation in the math texts I have read, since it varies so much.
