41–43 of 43 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't want != changed to ≠ because ≠ isn't a C++ operator. A colored != is not a C++ operator either. It's about getting our minds to differentiate symbols faster, not about whether they exist as is in some language's syntax.
Indeed, I program with syntax coloring disabled for this reason.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In fact , our visual system has been trained to instantly recognize a!=b in code Citation needed. > confusing = with == will lead to lots of errors etc This is more about NOT confusing == with = -- and several similar characters than the opposite. Sounds like you have thought of all kinds of arguments to not actually try it and see whether it's any good in practice -- which is how anything should be judged (unless…
The thing is, in general, if you are promoting some change, you need to show that it brings benefits. So the onus is on promoter - to show benefits. The onus is _not_ on everyone in the world to show whether the idea works or not.
If the change is harmless enough to try, one can just see for themselves.
And for things that work for some people but not for others, some general proof doesn't make sense anyway.
Nobody came and proved me how vim can work better for my editing than Emacs. I tried both myself and found out. Several for tons of other things that I adopted or not.