as i once said i decided to not use && and || as it annoys me (same s == annoys me)

so i will decide to use & | insted but as i not code regullarry today i
not yet maneged to test it throughly when it not work and
if it need big changes in languege to work

i mean one option is that & | should work for BOTH logical and bitwise

is it possible?

if not i wuld probably suggest using some other methods to make it work
(i could eventually say that &| would better work for logical and && ||
for bitwise but im not saing this becouse it would alos be bad imo)
so maybe better it should work for both (?)

if it not brings some problems i suspect something like

3&4 has different meaning in logical (1) and bitwise (7) but is that a problem?

overally seem oryginal C or even B was bests, then some populists come
(i name them populists, people with medicore mind lower than oryginal c quality - who was many and this majority make c worse even in back times
of first changes

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

On 07/09/2026 14:39, fir wrote:

as i once said i decided to not use && and || as it annoys me (same s == annoys me)

so i will decide to use & | insted but as i not code regullarry today i
not yet maneged to test it throughly when it not work and
if it need big changes in languege to work

i mean one option is that & | should work for BOTH logical and bitwise

is it possible?

No, because they do different things. But if you can only have one, then
& and | are more flexible:

I think 'A && B' is equivalent to '(!!A ? 1 : (!!B ? 1 : 0))', if a
boolean result is needed.

You can't do '!!A & !!B' because && short-circuits.

if not i wuld probably suggest using some other methods to make it work
(i could eventually say that &| would better work for logical and && ||
for bitwise but im not saing this becouse it would alos be bad imo)
so maybe better it should work for both (?)

if it not brings some problems i suspect something like

3&4 has different meaning in logical (1) and bitwise (7) but is that a problem?

Yeah, it's a problem: 3&4 has result 0, but 3&&4 has result 1. But in
this case, (!!3)&(!!4) can be used to give 1.



--- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

Am 07.09.2026 um 15:39 schrieb fir:

as i once said i decided to not use && and || as it annoys me (same s == annoys me)

Sick !

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

bart pisze:

On 07/09/2026 14:39, fir wrote:

as i once said i decided to not use && and || as it annoys me (same s
== annoys me)

so i will decide to use & | insted but as i not code regullarry today
i not yet maneged to test it throughly when it not work and
if it need big changes in languege to work

i mean one option is that & | should work for BOTH logical and bitwise

is it possible?

No, because they do different things. But if you can only have one, then
& and | areÿ more flexible:

I think 'A && B' is equivalent toÿ '(!!A ? 1 : (!!B ? 1 : 0))', if a
boolean result is needed.

You can't do '!!A & !!B' because && short-circuits.

if not i wuld probably suggest using some other methods to make it
work (i could eventually say that &| would better work for logical and
&& || for bitwise but im not saing this becouse it would alos be bad imo)
so maybe better it should work for both (?)

if it not brings some problems i suspect something like

3&4 has different meaning in logical (1) and bitwise (7) but is that a
problem?

Yeah, it's a problem: 3&4 has result 0, but 3&&4 has result 1. But in
this case, (!!3)&(!!4) can be used to give 1.

lol i misluked it - i thought 3&4 is 7

its kinda confusing

3&4 is logically true, so bitewise also should be true here t work, i guess

3|4 is logically also true , so bitewise it also should be true ?

to make it work?

"logical" operators and and or are for sure defined well in thsi sense
tahat A & B & C should be tru if all are true. otherwise false,
A|B|C should be true if only one or more is true.. though natural
reading here is confusing becouse for me as i said 3&4 for me "reads"as
7 (3|4 also "reads" as 7 probably)

it seems that those mathematical signs u and close to n (reversed u)
could fir better 3u4 = 7 3n4 = 0

SO

it seems that indeed & and | would not work becouse

A & 3 & 4 & B when A and B are true should give true
(and i assume A and B would be presented as 1 so result is 0)

A |3 |4 |B will give 7 - so in this case its ok, so it seems | work but
& fails

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

Bonita Montero pisze:

Am 07.09.2026 um 15:39 schrieb fir:

as i once said i decided to not use && and || as it annoys me (same s
== annoys me)

Sick !

well, it works, under some ciricumstances..and looks better and good
look matter


from my post above it seems that | works in all cases (it is when you
mix logical and bit components) but & will prbably not work if you will
mix bit components which are even values/has lowest bit 0

(i would need to check it yet

also there mat be chaged operator precedence


as i said it is clear to me that && || are C language design flaw

some common rule here would be not mix bitwise with logical

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)