Re: ≠ or not equal

[Richard Gaskin]

Mark Waddingham wrote:

 > Richard Gaskin wrote:
 >> Esp. given that "<>" is supported but almost unique to our language..
 >
 > "<>" is certainly not unique to our language. Indeed see here:
 >
 >      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relational_operator
 >
 > The use of <> is predominant in Pascal-like and BASIC-like languages.

Agreed.  I use qualifiers like "almost" to account for such cases.


 >> If we were talking about "==" I could understand.  The difference
 >> between "=" and "==" in languages that support both accounts for
 >> millions of lost hours for developers and end-users due to accidental
 >> bugs every year.
 >>
 >> But "!="?  I just don't see the harm.  Sometimes accommodating the
 >> rest of the world isn't a bad thing.
 >
 > Isn't that thoroughly inconsistent though? Why is "!=" special?

It isn't.  That's my point.  It's extremely common.  Ordinary.  Habit 
for many, including Monte.  Not special at all.  And for that reason I 
could think of no reason to exclude it once the work of adding it was 
already done and delivered.


 >> At a time when I hope we're all keenly sensitive to the need for
 >> increased adoption, this seems more of a focus on "We're different"
 >> than "We help you get the job done more efficiently".
 >
 > I'm not sure I see how adding "!=" is going to suddenly open the
 > flood-gates and see proportionally more users.

It's possible to dismiss anything using reductio ad absurdum.  We could 
have a field day with that here, and two clever wordsmiths could have 
quite a time of it.  But instead I'll try to focus on actionable outcomes.

Of course no single token is going to open any floodgates.  But I do 
believe it's worth pausing now and then to consider things that are 
common in other languages which may remove impediments to learning 
LiveCode if adopted here.

Imagine if instead of the fairly common bracket syntax we use for arrays 
they had been implemented in something more English-like.  Ugh.  Arrays 
are nicely done here, compact and a joy to use - and extra bonus points 
that if you've used associative arrays in nearly any other language you 
can grasp them easily in LiveCode.  One less thing to unlearn.

LiveCode requires learning uncommon ways of doing things, and in 
exchange it offers uncommon productivity.  Where something is uncommon 
but not truly required, my own inclination is to reconsider it.  If 
LiveCode were to evolve into the world's first anomaly-free 
syntactically pure programming language that achievement would mean 
little if only a handful ever use it.


Every healthy project can benefit from having a BDFL, and on the whole 
I'm glad your ours.  It would be strange if any two people agreed on 
everything all of the time.  Now and then you and I will have different 
opinions.  This is one of those times.  Even when I disagree, I do not 
disrespect.  I won't belabor this point further.

-- 
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Systems
  Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
  ____________________________________________________________________
  Ambassador at FourthWorld.com                http://www.FourthWorld.com