Re: ≠ or not equal

[Terence Heaford]

I think the answer is simple and has already been suggested in this thread.

Rely on “is not” and remove ≠ for completeness and ensure that when a script includes ≠ on a Mac it will not compile.

Although I have filed a bug, I don’t believe LC have decided what to do yet?

It’s not hard to traverse a project and remove ≠ with is not.


All the best


Terry


> On 17 Mar 2016, at 16:51, Richard Gaskin <ambassador at fourthworld.com> wrote:
> 
> In a language that has "playLoudness" to mean "soundVolume", a "destroyStack" property that doesn't destroy the stack, and "this me", adopting the world's most common way to express non-equivalence would seem a shoe-in.
> 
> Esp. given that "<>" is supported but almost unique to our language, and "≠" has been suggested by a member of the core dev team to be elevated from an undocumented convenience for HyperCard ports to a native token:
> <http://lists.runrev.com/pipermail/use-livecode/2016-March/224664.html <http://lists.runrev.com/pipermail/use-livecode/2016-March/224664.html>>
> 
> How does one even type "≠" in any keyboard other than a Mac?
> 
> 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.
> 
> 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".