Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!ukma!ufcsv!codas!mtune!whuts!homxb!hropus!ki4pv!tanner
From: tanner@ki4pv.uucp (Dr. T. Andrews)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Power operator?
Message-ID: <7227@ki4pv.uucp>
Date: 13 Jan 88 17:18:59 GMT
References: <11169@brl-adm.ARPA> <10026@ut-sally.UUCP> <7007@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Organization: CompuData, DeLand
Lines: 26
Summary: this is going to be somewhat confusing

In article <7007@brl-smoke.ARPA>, gwyn@brl-smoke.UUCP writes:
) In article <10026@ut-sally.UUCP> nather@ut-sally.UUCP (Ed Nather) writes:
) >      a ^^ b
) I think this is about as good a notation as we can get that is
) compatible with existing code.

I fear that this would cause some confusion.  While there is not
CURRENTLY a "logical" xor operator, consider the following table:

symbol	op		symbol	op
&	b-and		&&	l-and
|	b-or		||	l-or
^	b-xor		^^	power
=	cause equality	==	test equality
(b-operation=bitwise; l-operation=logical)

I don't know why there is no "logical" xor operation (same effect as
((op1 != 0)^(op2 != 0)) construction), but if one were to use the
"^^" symbol, it would seem reasonable to expect it to yield a logical
xor.

Also, is that a kitchen sink I see hidden away under the rationale?
Back behind that old stack of "codifying existing practice" bumper
stickers?
-- 
{allegra clyde!codas decvax!ucf-cs ihnp4!codas killer}!ki4pv!tanner