Re^8: Burned by precedence rules (eqv)

in reply to Re^7: Burned by precedence rules (eqv)
in thread Burned by precedence rules

Well, we can't use eqv because we already use that for something else, but we do have a Boolean not-equal already:

    $x ?^ $y
[download]

What we don't have is a Boolean equal. I thought about adding:

    $x ?= $y
[download]

but people would probably think that means:

    $x = $x ? $y;
[download]

which is nonsense, but they'd still think it. :-)

Anyway, the utility is not worth the extra complexity, in my opinion. Comparing two Booleans for equivalence is an odd enough thing to do that I don't mind if it looks a little odd.

Comment on Re^8: Burned by precedence rules (eqv) Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^9: Burned by precedence rules (eqv) by tilly (Archbishop) on Dec 31, 2008 at 03:58 UTC
What about saying that !( potential boolean operator ) means the boolean negation of the boolean operator? That would naturally give you the logical operators !&& (nand), !\|\| (nor) and !^ (not xor). The last would, of course, be Boolean equals. (I can't believe I just suggested that.)	[reply]
Re^9: Burned by precedence rules (eqv) by tye (Sage) on Dec 31, 2008 at 03:47 UTC
Note that I did include a winky smiley. But I saved the clincher argument for now: Perl 6 is becoming so like VB, it will be very surprising to VBers when the purpose of `eqv` is so different. :-D - tye	[reply]

In Section Meditations