http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3481
Stewart Gordon <s...@iname.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |s...@iname.com --- Comment #5 from Stewart Gordon <s...@iname.com> 2009-11-07 18:47:17 PST --- (In reply to comment #1) > I've been wanting an exponentiation operator since the Stone Age, but it > seemed > like too small an issue to really make a point about. This is terrific. > However, can we at least consider making ^ the exponentiation op and moving > xor > to ^^? Yes, it breaks C compatibility, but who the heck really uses bitwise > xor except in really low-level code anyhow? Are we going to change around the other bitwise vs. logical operators as well? Confusion with the bitwise operators is why I'm against the choice of ^ or ^^ for exponentiation. Sooner or later, someone's going to expect ^^ to be the logical xor operator. But I don't know what would be a good symbol for it. I'm not sure I've ever really liked **, aside from the current meanings of those two characters in sequence. Maybe if only ↑ had remained on keyboards beyond ZX Spectrum days.... -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------