5 ms·
> and basically no languages have an implication operator Prolog does, but more intriguingly, so does Nix!
by patrec 4y ago
> and basically no languages have an implication operator
Prolog does, but more intriguingly, so does Nix!
- ectopod 4y agoAlso Visual Basic!
- mirekrusin 4y agoAnd coq.
- int_19h 4y agoMost PC BASIC dialects had the IMP operator - it was already there in GWBASIC, for example. But it's not quite the same thing, because all "boolean" operators in BASICs of old were actually bitwise! It worked in practice because the convention was to represent true as all-bits-set (i.e. -1 in two's complement). No short-circuit evaluation, of course - but back then, even languages that had dedicated boolean data types, like Pascal, didn't do it either.
- hcs 4y agoI was surprised to find that Algol 60 had implication in among the Boolean operators, makes sense given the formal background, never got picked up by its many descendants.