Chris Dutton wrote:
So many operators...
Well, this seems a good as time as any to jump in with what's been
sticking in my brain for a while now. Last June, Simon C. wrote a
little philosophical thing, Half measures all around, which generated
the appropriate amount of good discussion. I want
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Lazzaro) writes:
But our version of understandable still means a steep, steep learning
curve.
It's worse than that; for practitioners of many languages, the learning
curve has a 180 degree turn.
Quick: what are the bitwise operators in Java, JavaScript, C, C++, C#,
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
So lets have _lots_ of operators, and _lots_ of two-to-four-letter
barewords, so long as they each do something Big, or something
Universal. And let's locale-ize them, so that non-english-speakers can
use 'umu' to mean 'bool', etc. Hey, why the
On 26 Oct 2002, Simon Cozens wrote:
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Lazzaro) writes:
: But our version of understandable still means a steep, steep learning
: curve.
:
: It's worse than that; for practitioners of many languages, the learning
: curve has a 180 degree turn.
:
: Quick: what are the
Michael Lazzaro wrote:
Here's my own argument for using like/unlike, and none, and a
bunch of other english-sounding things we haven't even talked about
yet.
... I don't think we've put much of a dent in the readability
complaints ... I think we need to care about these concerns a _lot_
On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 09:23:19PM -, Smylers wrote:
Michael Lazzaro wrote:
Here's my own argument for using like/unlike, and none, and a
bunch of other english-sounding things we haven't even talked about
yet.
... I don't think we've put much of a dent in the readability
Paul Johnson wrote:
On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 09:23:19PM -, Smylers wrote:
I believe that having English aliases would make matters worse.
I agree, in general. I was planning on writing something about this.
Now I don't have to :-)
Pleased to be of help!
The only thing I would add,
