Re: c needs this sign

From	fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: c needs this sign
Date	2026-09-08 12:28 +0200
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<117onvt$3370$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	<117mfle$3aage$1@dont-email.me> <XnsB4C09C349E5C2hueydlltampabayrrcom@157.180.91.226> <117ng9q$2236i$2@dont-email.me> <117om5f$2eem$1@dont-email.me> <117on5c$2qpg$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

bart pisze:
> On 08/09/2026 10:56, fir wrote:
>> Janis Papanagnou pisze:
>>> On 2026-09-07 21:21, David LaRue wrote:
>>>> fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> wrote in news:117mfle$3aage$1@dont- 
>>>> email.me:
>>>>
>>>>> im not sure if in usenet message i am able to draw it but maybe put it
>>>>> in some editor that has font where chars are same size
>>>>>
>>>>> .................
>>>>> .................
>>>>> .................
>>>>> ..*************..
>>>>> ..*************..
>>>>> .................
>>>>> .................
>>>>> ..*************..
>>>>> ..*************..
>>>>> ..**.............
>>>>> ..**.............
>>>>> .................
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> it is like = but with some small line, suggestin it is for assign 
>>>>> not for
>>>>> equality,,, asci dont have it more worse im not sure if even 
>>>>> unicode has
>>>>> it and this is shocking
>>>
>>> I'm lacking context why you need that, for what you need that, what it
>>> is supposed to mean - differentiate assignment from equality; is that
>>> what you tried to express? - and why it's non-existence is "shocking".
>>>
>>
>>
>> i make some deductions about C (im not sure if i can it deduction here 
>> but it is thinking with yeald to quite grounded conclusions (i find it 
>> almost scientific - in some way)
>>
>> some time ago (not even so long it was probably like i was lats time 
>> visiting this group) i concluded that if(a==3) is wrong and it seems
>> one and only proper way here is   if(a=3) it means = may be for 
>> comparison, not for assigment
> 
> It IS wrong in my view, but the fact is that most languages now use '=' 
> for assignment, and those using C-like syntax use '==' for equality.
> 
> C is obviously never going to change, but some languages do still use 
> '=' for equality, and for assignment they might use any of:
> 
>    :=
>    <-
>    ->
>    =       (when assignments are not allowed in expression)
> 
> A few might use a quite different syntax (eg. Lisp or COBOL).
> 
> Using an obscure, hard to see and hard to type symbol like ⥫ is not 
> practical.
> 
> (I use '=' for equality, ':=' for runtime assignment, but I also use '=' 
> for compile-time assignments and identities, since there is no ambiguity.)
> 
> Of course this might all be irrelevant in a couple more years when 
> everyone uses tools to write code for them.


well of course when i say on c here i mix two separate cases

1) one is whan can be in fact changed in c (like the list of annoances 
was in thic category, becouse there also are possible addons to c but it 
would change it so much it wouldnt be quite c so this would be in second 
category)


2) the one that is based on C ideas but the conclusions deduced from c 
ideas would make practically different language


the new sign i talk eventually even could be added maybe to old c
but indeed unlikely..so maybe what i say here is around the second 
category (it is on c ideas)


AS i said i personally think old c should not change and what thic c 
comitee is doing is probably mostly wrong..i think though they should
even revert some changes back - but some of this annoyances i mentioned 
they really could add to c (like this seeing down symbols and ad hoc 
enum tags especially - or at least allow 64 bit tags ('dEf3effe' etc) )

SO I MIX THIS ABOVE TWO CATEGORIES but it would be inpractical to each 
time talk clearly on which category im talking, so i skip it as
some my himself guess what would be practical in old ca nad what not


as to non practicality imo in new co some could in fact do some 
remapping of keywoard and add some new chars like in control+key or 
alt+key becouse overally you need more chars for operators in new modern 
language imo

obviously there could be no compromises in new language ;c

Thread

c needs this sign fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-07 15:53 +0200
  Re: c needs this sign David LaRue <huey.dll@tampabay.rr.com> - 2026-09-07 19:21 +0000
    Re: c needs this sign Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-08 01:10 +0200
      Re: c needs this sign Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2026-09-07 23:13 +0000
        Re: c needs this sign Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-07 17:26 -0600
      Re: c needs this sign David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-08 10:40 +0200
        Re: c needs this sign Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-09 10:49 +0200
          Re: c needs this sign David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-09 13:21 +0200
            Re: c needs this sign fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 13:33 +0200
            Support of Unicode characters in various places (was Re: c needs this sign) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-09 21:37 +0200
              Re: Support of Unicode characters in various places (was Re: c needs this sign) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-10 09:01 +0200
                Re: Support of Unicode characters in various places (was Re: c needs this sign) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-10 23:13 +0200
                Re: Support of Unicode characters in various places (was Re: c needs this sign) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 14:54 -0700
                Re: Support of Unicode characters in various places (was Re: c needs this sign) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-10 22:17 +0000
                Re: Support of Unicode characters in various places (was Re: c needs this sign) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 15:48 -0700
                Re: Support of Unicode characters in various places (was Re: c needs this sign) bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-11 10:51 +0100
                Re: Support of Unicode characters in various places (was Re: c needs this sign) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-11 12:49 +0200
                Re: Support of Unicode characters in various places (was Re: c needs this sign) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-11 16:28 +0000
                Re: Support of Unicode characters in various places (was Re: c needs this sign) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-11 02:03 +0200
                Re: Support of Unicode characters in various places (was Re: c needs this sign) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 17:13 -0700
                Re: Support of Unicode characters in various places (was Re: c needs this sign) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-11 02:24 +0200
                Re: Support of Unicode characters in various places (was Re: c needs this sign) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-11 09:42 +0200
          Re: c needs this sign fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 23:59 +0200
            Re: c needs this sign fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 00:04 +0200
              Re: c needs this sign fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 00:16 +0200
                Re: c needs this sign fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 00:30 +0200
              Re: c needs this sign bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-09 23:44 +0100
                Re: c needs this sign fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 00:55 +0200
                Re: c needs this sign fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 01:09 +0200
                Re: c needs this sign fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 01:21 +0200
                Re: c needs this sign fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 01:36 +0200
                Re: c needs this sign fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 01:45 +0200
                Re: c needs this sign Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-15 07:23 +0000
      Re: c needs this sign fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 11:56 +0200
        Re: c needs this sign bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-08 11:14 +0100
          Re: c needs this sign fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 12:28 +0200
          Re: c needs this sign Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 03:54 -0700
            Re: c needs this sign fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 13:13 +0200
            = vs. == (again!) (Was: c needs this sign) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-09-08 14:39 +0000
              Re: = vs. == (again!) (Was: c needs this sign) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-10-14 23:36 -0700
            Re: c needs this sign Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-09 11:13 +0200
          Re: c needs this sign Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-09 00:29 +0000
            Re: c needs this sign "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 13:42 -0700
      Re: c needs this sign fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 15:12 +0200
  Re: c needs this sign Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-08 03:33 +0000
    Re: c needs this sign fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 12:02 +0200
      Re: c needs this sign Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-09 00:27 +0000

csiph-web