On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
: > As a productive prefix, it has limits, but there are actually very few
: > operators that make sense to be bitified, and none of them look like a
: > method name.
:
: Could users redefine how the prefixes work and get the productions for
: free?
On 2002-10-17 at 22:52:49, Smylers wrote:
> Larry Wall wrote:
>
> > $a .| $b# bitwise or
> > $a .! $b# bitwise xor
>
> On glancing down your list I initially misread the bar as an exclamation
> mark. I realize that this is a sample size of one, but certainly in
> this ter
On Wednesday, October 16, 2002, at 04:55 PM, Smylers wrote:
How about keeping caret for xor?
$a ~^ $b # bitwise xor
$a ^^ $b # logical xor
Hm, the "seagull operator"?
David
--
David Wheeler AIM: dwTheory
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thursday, October 17, 2002, at 11:49 AM, Shapiro, Jonathan wrote:
Well, let's look at a few possibilities:
1) if( $vec bit| $mask bit& $mask2 )
2) if( $vec b| $mask b& $mask2 )
3) if( $vec |b $mask &b $mask2 )
4) if( $vec |bit $mask &bit $mask2 )
I think I would have an easier tim
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Adam D. Lopresto wrote:
> > : It's rare enough to need bitwise things in Perl 5 (outside golf). I'm
> > : hoping that it'll be even rarer in Perl 6, as better interfaces are
> > : designed for the things which at present require flipping individual
> > : bits.
> >
> > I almos
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Adam D. Lopresto wrote:
: Then again, it always seemed odd that you combine two flags with | to turn them both
: on). There could probably be a bitwise type that would overload superpositions
: to do bitwise math instead...
:
: my Bitwise $a = 1; #woohoo, $a and $b are no lo
On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 02:57:22PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> I find those difficult to read--too wordy. At the moment I'm leaning towards
>
> $a .| $b # bitwise or
> $a .& $b # bitwise and
> $a .! $b # bitwise xor
> .! $b # bitwise not
> $a ! $b # logical xor
> !
On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 04:07:51PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> [1]: This comes from a recent discussion on perlmonks where i attempted
> to formally iron things out for people, since i have yet to see anywhere
> thus far on the web where it was actually formalized.
> (formalization being mark
Larry Wall wrote:
> $a .| $b # bitwise or
> $a .! $b # bitwise xor
On glancing down your list I initially misread the bar as an exclamation
mark. I realize that this is a sample size of one, but certainly in
this terminal font those only differ by a single pixel and it's possible
that
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Brent Dax wrote:
: Shapiro, Jonathan:
: # Well, let's look at a few possibilities:
: #
: # 1) if( $vec bit| $mask bit& $mask2 )
: #
: # 2) if( $vec b| $mask b& $mask2 )
: #
: # 3) if( $vec |b $mask &b $mask2 )
: #
: # 4) if( $vec |bit $mask &bit $mask2 )
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, John Williams wrote:
> > > : It's rare enough to need bitwise things in Perl 5 (outside golf).
I'm
> > > : hoping that it'll be even rarer in Perl 6, as better interfaces are
> > > : designed for the things which at present require flipping individual
> > > : bits.
> > >
> >
On 16 Oct 2002, Smylers wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
:
: > : $x ~& $y # bitwise and
: > : $x ~| $y # bitwise or
: > :
: > : ~!$x # bitwise not
: >
: > I think I like that. Except now we'll get things like:
: >
: > @x ^~|= @y;
: >
: > Hmm...and then there's:
: >
: > $a ~? $
Shapiro, Jonathan:
# Well, let's look at a few possibilities:
#
# 1)if( $vec bit| $mask bit& $mask2 )
#
# 2)if( $vec b| $mask b& $mask2 )
#
# 3)if( $vec |b $mask &b $mask2 )
#
# 4)if( $vec |bit $mask &bit $mask2 )
What's wrong with 'bitand' and 'bitor' (or e
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, David Wheeler wrote:
: On Thursday, October 17, 2002, at 11:49 AM, Shapiro, Jonathan wrote:
:
: > Well, let's look at a few possibilities:
: >
: > 1) if( $vec bit| $mask bit& $mask2 )
: >
: > 2) if( $vec b| $mask b& $mask2 )
: >
: > 3) if( $vec |b $mask &b $mask2 )
> : It's rare enough to need bitwise things in Perl 5 (outside golf). I'm
> : hoping that it'll be even rarer in Perl 6, as better interfaces are
> : designed for the things which at present require flipping individual
> : bits.
>
> I almost wonder if it's wrong to waste ~ on it...
>
> That woul
15 matches
Mail list logo
