Asterisks are not Sexy
|
04-21-2016, 09:02 AM
Post: #12
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy
(04-20-2016 04:05 PM)DrD Wrote: So, it's not about being consistent with the multiplication sign, (number X number), but if it's number and literally anything else, use whatever is handy? I vote for the asterisk as a consistent multiplication sign. No implication, no cdot, no cross, no confusion. Just because it came a little late in the game, isn't good reason to ditch it and blame. It is said that you CAN use the cdot or space between letter, not that you HAVE to. Point 5.3.6 has an example with a cross b. So the cross is consistent. I am aware that the cross can be confused with x (that's why we often use space or cdot between letters) The asterisk is for sure a good solution from this point of view as you can not confuse it with the x letter nor with the decimal point. I would prefer the cdot, as the prime uses the "lower" decimal point, so it can hardly be confused. Programming languages used the asterisk in the 80' (70'?) because there was no cdot on the keyboard. I think the best would be if you could choose it, as proposed by compsystems. |
|||
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Messages In This Thread |
Asterisks are not Sexy - sguth - 04-19-2016, 04:03 PM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - eried - 04-19-2016, 05:45 PM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - Gilles - 04-19-2016, 05:59 PM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - Tim Wessman - 04-19-2016, 08:35 PM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - informach - 04-20-2016, 12:31 AM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - TASP - 04-20-2016, 01:25 AM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - retoa - 04-20-2016, 08:30 AM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - DrD - 04-20-2016, 09:36 AM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - retoa - 04-20-2016, 12:07 PM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - DrD - 04-20-2016, 04:05 PM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - retoa - 04-21-2016 09:02 AM
RE: Asterisks are not Sexy - Fortin - 04-20-2016, 11:49 AM
|
User(s) browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)