3 ms·
If these things are almost never used or should never be used, why are they allowed to exist?
by omouse 17y ago
If these things are almost never used or should never be used, why are they allowed to exist?
- bmj 17y agoTMTOWTDI (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There%27s_more_than_one_way_to_do_it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There%27s_more_than_one_way_to_...) Such freedom is at the core of the language.
- jerf 17y agoFor the most part, they don't exist! Only the <=> operator in that list actually exists. The rest are combinations of perfectly sensible operators. "Why does Haskell have (.) . (.)?" It doesn't. It's just a combination of legal characters that happens to also be a joke. (And as wacky as <=> may appear, in the context of Perl, with its separate string vs. numeric comparison operators, it's not even that strange. It is a combination less than, equal, or greater than operator. "cmp" is the equivalent for strings.)