HaloO,
Jonathan Lang wrote:

Larry Wall wrote:

But I'm still somewhat set against the notion of using logical ops to
do set theory. (Even if you put parens around them.)

Understandably so. Perhaps "(u)" and "(n)" would be better ASCII
equivalents for the union and intersection operators...

Hmm, I think using the dualism between set operations and
boolean operations is a good thing. Note that there is an
isomorphism between &&, || and ! for the logical side and
(&), (|) and (!) for sets---DeMorgan etc. We could even
introduce low precedence versions (and), (or) and (not).
Well, and of course (^) and (xor) corresponding to ^^ and
xor. They all form nice mnemonics for each other.
Regards, TSa.
--