Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED.news.iecc.com!nerds-end From: Derek Jones Newsgroups: comp.compilers Subject: Re: Programming language similarity Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2022 20:51:30 +0100 Organization: Compilers Central Lines: 17 Sender: news@iecc.com Approved: comp.compilers@iecc.com Message-ID: <22-04-019@comp.compilers> References: <22-04-012@comp.compilers> <22-04-016@comp.compilers> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="22931"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com" Keywords: history Posted-Date: 25 Apr 2022 16:54:55 EDT X-submission-address: compilers@iecc.com X-moderator-address: compilers-request@iecc.com X-FAQ-and-archives: http://compilers.iecc.com Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <22-04-016@comp.compilers> Xref: csiph.com comp.compilers:2985 Jan, > Denis Roegel: A brief survey of 20th century logical notations (https://hal.inria.fr/hal-02340520/document) This is an interesting collection of decisions made by authors over 120 years. What makes somebody choose a particular set of symbols. My guess is that their past experience is a major factor, i.e., the use of symbols they had previously been exposed to. Of course it could be something as mundane as the characters available on their typewriter, or their printer of the journal the work was published in. Then again, academics do love to do their own thing. Perhaps the decisions are based on the need to be different.