Digraphs *and* Unicode pretty-glyphs, for arrows, triangle, etc.

Herby Vojčík herby at mailbox.sk
Thu Apr 5 03:06:24 PDT 2012


Yeah, I'd like them. I just thought it is no point suggesting.

Norbert Lindenberg wrote:
> A few others relevant to EcmaScript:
>
> === ⩶
Why not ≡ (to match !==). It has also better meaning.

> != ≠
> !== ≢
> ... …
> ! ¬
> * ×
> / ÷
Yes! I'd like to see the last two (not is nice, too), to split it from 
other meanings of / and *.

&& ∧
||in ∈

== ≈
!== ≉


(and just for fun:
for ∀
if ∃
though I think that the first would work :-) )

> Infinity ∞
> sqrt √
> cbrt ∛
> PI π
> Intl 🌐 // requires better fonts (http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/1f310/)
>
> Besides typing, legibility is critical: ⇒, ≥, ≤ are clearly
> improvements over their ASCII counterparts, but ≠ and ≢ are too hard
> to  tell apart.

I think there should be not ≠ (!== is anyway not very good to use, one 
should favor !===) only ≡ and ≢ for === and !===.

> Norbert
>
>
> On Apr 4, 2012, at 22:23 , Brendan Eich wrote:
>
>>  From http://www.scala-lang.org/node/4723 (hat tip *Corey Farwell*‏@*frewsxcv*<https://twitter.com/#%21/frewsxcv>
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>> ):
>>
>>   =>    ⇒   // implemented
>>   <-  ←   // implemented
>>   ->    →   // implemented
>>   ==  ⩵
>>   >>  ≫
>>   <<    ≪
>>   >>>  ⋙
For these three I am concerned with meaning... it should be neither 
"French quotes" nor "much greater/lesser than".

>>   >=  ≥
>>   <=  ≤
>>   ::  ∷
>>
>>
>> Corey suggested editors could do the input conversion when users type the digraph. If Scala can go here, why not JS?
>>
>> /be

Herby


More information about the es-discuss mailing list