As an operator on booleans exclusively, or as a more general control-flow thing? Can you use it in an example?
By the way I would like to take this moment to state, for the millionth time, my loathing for programming languages that have logical "and" and "or" operators but no logical "xor" And by this I mean: nearly every single programming language ever divised
-
-
-
Code I just wrote if xor(eye == "left", blinking(2)) then "blinking(2)" is a helper function that returns true if the current time in seconds divided by 2 is even. in other words, this does flow control for left-eye vs right-eye rendering paths, but every 2 seconds they switch
-
in general, what i want is something that has semantics as reasonably close to "or" and "and" as possible, providing exclusive-or, which i don't have to toss in as a helper function in random projects
-
i want it to either typecheck-require its inputs be of type bool, or coerce its inputs to bool, depending on whatever "and" and "or" do in the host language
-
i implemented this as local function xor(a, b) return (a and not b) or (b and not a) end but i could have done so as return toboolean(a) != toboolean(b)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Ok like im sure this is a stupid question but I've only used like 3 programming languages ever, is there a difference between "regular xor" and "logical xor"?
-
"logical xor" is what i would refer to as "regular xor" There are only two xors, "logical xor" and "bitwise xor" Most languages offer either only bitwise xor, or neither form of xor
-
isn't logical xor just !=
-
logical xor is equivalent to toboolean(x) != toboolean(y) but is not equivalent to !=
-
ah okay. If you have bool types tho it should be okay to do that.
-
however, i would prefer an operator for readability, given "xor" communicates something specific and "toboolean(x) != toboolean(y)" might require a moment' sthought
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
is this something that comes up a lot in the year of our lord 2018
-
WELL IT DOES A LOT FOR ME BUT APPARENTLY I AM THE ONLY PERSON ON EARTH WHO COMPUTES EXPRESSIONS USING LOGICAL XOR
-
to level the playing field, implement all of your logic out of NOTs and ORs
-
NAND should be enough for anybody
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Normally, you can use the bitwise xor operator ^ in C and
@rustlang -
It does not coerce to bool, so if you want logical XOR and you say 3 ^ 8 It will not do what you expected
-
For C, that's certainly true. However, your example won't work in Rust, as it will result in a numerical type such as i32 (and not in a bool).
-
Okay. So what you are saying is that Rust has the Java behavior and ^ will perform bitwise XOR when its arguments are integers and logical XOR when its arguments are booleans?
-
Yes :-) You can quickly check this yourself on https://play.rust-lang.org/
-
That's useful to know, thanks very much.
-
Always glad to help!
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.