Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:41 PM, Brendan Eich<brendan at mozilla.com> wrote:
>> > John Barton wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> offline Mark lured me in to making more suggestions. I bit:
>>> >>
>>> >> p1>< foo(a,b); // p1 "eventually when the sand runs out" foo(a,b);
>>> >> p1<> foo(a,b); // Because a wikipedia page has diamond for temporal logic
>>> >> 'eventually'.
>>> >>
>>> >> I guess angle brackets in general are trouble however, I recall some
>>> >> issues with<html> and JS.
>> >
>> >
>> > Probably best to avoid<>, although in HTML, only</ followed by certain
>> > letters would be a problem;-).
>
> Yeah, nothing wrong with<> inside of<script> blocks. So long as we
> never define a</script> operator we're okay.
But I agree with John: <> and >< have "issues", not just in context of
HTML, but also there -- readability/grawlix/overloaded-character at least.
/be
forbes at lindesay.co.uk (2013-12-21T09:40:56.315Z)
But I agree with John: `<>` and `><` have "issues", not just in context of HTML, but also there -- readability/grawlix/overloaded-character at least.
