On Mon, 29 Nov 1999, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> > I'd not object if we removed these operators and instead provided
> > functions with the standard names log() and exp() for all the
> > non-integral numeric types. Comments?
>
> I have no great fondness for ";" and ":" as operators, but would like
> to see some operators assigned to these functions. Certainly the carat
> "^" could work for exp() (or maybe "**" to make those old Fortran
> programmers feel better about themselves ;), and perhaps "!^" for
> log()? Any other ideas for appropriate symbols for these operators??
I wasn't aware of any Obfuscated SQL Contest ...
I personally think that the greatest possible benefit can only be derived
if all of this looks as much as possible like actual mathematical writing.
Thus I could agree with a power operator '^' and perhaps even a unary '^'
exponential operator, although that's already questionable. But by
inventing non-standard operators for every function under the sun, just to
have one, you're not doing anyone (including yourself) a favour.
That's just me though. As you said yourself, good ideas will stand the
test of an extended discussion ;)
--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders vaeg 10:115
peter_e@gmx.net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden
