*blink* That's neat.

[Martijn Faassen]

Niels Diepeveen <niels at endea.demon.nl> wrote:
> Martijn Faassen schreef:
>> And it would seem to be very hard to do away with booleans
>> on the semantic level; is there any programming language that does without
>> 'and' and 'or' equivalents?

> Early BASIC, I think. It's not too hard to get rid of "and" and "not",
> for example, write "if a and not b" as:
>  if a:
>      if b: pass
>      else:
>          ...

Ah, right; true. I hadn't thought of that. Messy. But then we're talking about
early BASIC. :)

> Doing without "or" gets messy if you don't have "goto". Nested if-elses
> with a single boolean operator is probably something most people can
> deal with.

One would hope so! If we were evil trolls we'd pull a Greg Ward and 
post a message by Guido claiming he wants to get rid of 'and' for this
reason. :)

Regards,

Martijn
-- 
History of the 20th Century: WW1, WW2, WW3?
No, WWW -- Could we be going in the right direction?