Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Interrobang

99percentinvisible.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 123 posts

Re: Interrobang

#2

Post by drfuchs »

The second paragraph of TFA mentions "ox-turn" line breaking (alternating left-to-right and right-to-left lines), but unforgivably fails to mention every typographer's favorite vocabulary word for this: "boustrophedonic".

Re: Interrobang

#4

Post by hurpaDurpa »

This would really make for a great exception operator, for one-liner exception handling.

  (alert(null) ‽ console.log(error));
Better than:

  (x === null ? console.log(error) : alert(x));
EDIT: hey downvotes, let's play funny/not funny.

Re: Interrobang

#5

Post by snarfy »

hurpaDurpa wrote: post #4

This would really make for a great exception operator, for one-liner exception handling. (alert(null) ‽ console.log(error)); Better than: (x === null ? console.log(error) : alert(x)); EDIT: hey downvotes, let's play funny/not funny .

I can't seem to find the ‽ key on my keyboard.

Re: Interrobang

#6

Post by hurpaDurpa »

snarfy wrote: post #5
hurpaDurpa wrote: post #4

This would really make for a great exception operator, for one-liner exception handling. (alert(null) ‽ console.log(error)); Better than: (x === null ? console.log(error) : alert(x)); EDIT: hey downvotes, let's play funny/not funny .

I can't seem to find the ‽ key on my keyboard.

Well, obviously, the compiler could also interpret the consecutive use of each of the two distinct characters question mark (?) and exclamation point (!). But it would have to tolerate both options to remain convenient (?! and !? have the same effect).

Meanwhile the interrobang (‽) would really be an Easter egg.

Re: Interrobang

#7

Post by Jarred »

hurpaDurpa wrote: post #4

This would really make for a great exception operator, for one-liner exception handling. (alert(null) ‽ console.log(error)); Better than: (x === null ? console.log(error) : alert(x)); EDIT: hey downvotes, let's play funny/not funny .

alternatively:

  // Would run console.error with the Error object
  (alert(x) ?: console.error);

Re: Interrobang

#8

Post by empath75 »

snarfy wrote: post #5
hurpaDurpa wrote: post #4

This would really make for a great exception operator, for one-liner exception handling. (alert(null) ‽ console.log(error)); Better than: (x === null ? console.log(error) : alert(x)); EDIT: hey downvotes, let's play funny/not funny .

I can't seem to find the ‽ key on my keyboard.

With ligatures you can just use ?! and make it look that way.

Re: Interrobang

#9

Post by simcop2387 »

hurpaDurpa wrote: post #6
snarfy wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't seem to find the ‽ key on my keyboard.

Well, obviously, the compiler could also interpret the consecutive use of each of the two distinct characters question mark (?) and exclamation point (!). But it would have to tolerate both options to remain convenient (?! and !? have the same effect). Meanwhile the interrobang (‽) would really be an Easter egg.

most languages wouldn't work properly with ?! as that could be already valid (unary ! operator meaning not, and ? being used for the ternay operator). So you can't distinguish between: foo ?!bar : baz and an interrobang like operator. !? on the otherhand is likely to already be invalid and be parseable as an interrobang since it wouldn't already be valid to have a ? immediately following a ! in many languages. Having both work might be nice, but is likely impracticle for backwards compatibility.
Post reply on HN