Hi Magnus, when there was talk here about a ^^ operator for logical eXclusive OR, I was looking for precedence in other languages.   There are two differences in Raku regarding shortcut operators and ^ to the usual C like notations:   1. Shortcut Operators return one of the arguments Raku's shortcut logical operators tests for True- or False-ness of their arguments, but return one of the original arguments. However, Raku's non-shortcut logical operators tests for True- or False-ness of their arguments and return a boolean True or False.    2. Both ^ and ^^ test for exactly one True value instead of for an odd number of True values (parity) This makes ^^ a true short-cut operator, as it stops (and ^ returns False and ^^ returns Nil), after/if a second true value has been encountered   I would not propose to change the existing well-established operators in C++.   But this is an interesting functionality:  - && returns the first False argument (otherwise the last argument)  - || returns the first True argument (otherwise the last argument)  - ^^ returns the only True argument (or Nil if more than one otherwise the last argument)  - // returns the first defined argument (otherwise the last argument)  - min returns the smallest argument  - max returns the largest argument   In C++ speak the original argument is used and recovered after an implicit conversion. In C++ this can be compared with std::ranges::find_if, std::ranges::find_if_not and std::ranges::minmax with the use of a projection to bool or int.   Best, Sebastian   -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von:Magnus Fromreide <magfr_at_[hidden]> Gesendet:Do 11.05.2023 08:21 Betreff:Re: [std-proposals] ^^operator [was: Re: New draft proposal: Add "%s" (two-digit truncated-integer seconds) as a std::format conversion specifier for std::chrono time types.] An:Sebastian Wittmeier via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden]>; CC:Jonathan Wakely <cxx_at_[hidden]>; Sebastian Wittmeier <wittmeier_at_[hidden]>; On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 10:54:21AM +0200, Sebastian Wittmeier via Std-Proposals wrote: > Should be: > >   > auto operator^^(auto A, auto B) > > { > >     if(A && !B) > >         return A; > >     if(B && !A) > >         return B; > >     return nil; > > } > That is a surprising formulation - not bad but surprising. Consider operator ||, do you propose to change it to something along the lines of auto operator||(auto A, auto B) { if (A) return A; else return B; } but with extra magic to short-circut? /MF