Multiple proposals!

[hanyuone]

There are three four proposals here.

Proposal 1: Multiple statements in conds.

var asdf = 1
cond asdf -> [
    var abcd = 1
    var other = 110
]/[
    var abcd = 0
]
out abcd

Output: 1

---

Proposal 2: @ working for multiple chars at once, something like this:

out @(10001,100111,1111010)

(This can be extended to all prefix built-in commands).

---

Proposal 3: Null values for variables.

var x
# x is now equal to an empty binary string (or represented as [] in processing code)

---

Proposal 4: Boolean command.

Uses the ? symbol (prefix).

out ?10011

Output: 1

[bortkiewicz]

Note on Proposal 3: can't we change it to var x = void?

Also, could there be comments, like var x=1 ?assign x?

and

?This program
prints out 1.?
out 1

This is useful since I find Logicode as knotted and twisted as Brainfuck...

[hanyuone]

There's already comments, using #. So, like this:

# This is a line comment

As for your tip on Proposal 3, sure, why not. I personally favour my own proposal, though.

[somebody1234]

IMO proposal 3 should be var foo just makes it ininitialized (i.e. empty)

[hanyuone]

@somebody1234 Oh yeah, that could work.

[bortkiewicz]

There's already comments, using #. So, like this:

it's not in the wiki, how do I know??

var foo and var foo = void and var foo = 0 all make sense, however var foo = 0 means something quite different..

[hanyuone]

@testitem Yeah, I'm still busy making the docs from scratch... sorry if it's under-documented.

[bortkiewicz]

oh. wanna me to help you?

P.S. do we need this?? https://testitemqlstudio.visualstudio.com/Logicode

[hanyuone]

@testitem What is that?

[bortkiewicz]

Well just a branched version of Logicode... I work on that most of the time and I get ideas from the Github repo's code

[bortkiewicz]

So Proposal Number 3 is done, and as "var foo = "?

[hanyuone]

@testitem That's changed to var foo (so it's done). Also, Proposal 1 is done, as well as Proposal 4. Which just leaves Proposal 2, which I'll get around to later.

[bortkiewicz]

Wait what is ? again?