From: Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks>
Subject: The IMP Saga Continues. Microslop Fails As Usual
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 28
Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!diablo1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!news.usenetexpress.com!not-for-mail
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2024 17:07:38 +0000
Nntp-Posting-Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2024 17:07:38 +0000
X-Received-Bytes: 1399
Organization: UsenetExpress - www.usenetexpress.com
X-Complaints-To: abuse@usenetexpress.com
Message-Id: <17bfc25626118a56$68$3081049$802601b3@news.usenetexpress.com>
Bytes: 1793

Since I am an assembly language guru, and since I never had before
encountered the IMP operator, I was curious as to why this ridiculous
abomination would ever be included in ANY programming language.

Check this article from over 10 years ago:

https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/184089/why-dont-languages-include-implication-as-a-logical-operator

These are the definitive responses:

"Implication is very counter-intuitive, even to logic-minded people
such as programmers. The fact that three out of the four truth table
entries are true surprises many people."

"At the same time, there is an easy workaround: use operators ! and ||"

That is, "A => B" is equivalent to "~A OR B."

But Microslop included the IMP operator.  Why?

Because Microslop believed that they were the authority on
everything digital.  But no one ever used Microslop IMP.
The "authority" thus failed big time.

C does not have it, because C, like FOSS, is created by
rational and competent people.