Talk:Operator (computer programming)

Dispute: Accuracy, Verifiability and Original research

ISO/IEC 2382 The Standard Vocabulary for Information Technology defines 'operator' as a symbol that identifies or represents an operation. It does not limit the symbol to single characters. Thus, '+', 'add', 'first', 'next' could all be operators.

This article lacks citations and appears inaccurate. It appears to confuse the symbol with what the symbol represents. If a citation exists to support this non-standard definition, please provide it and adjust the article to give the standard definition as well to avoid POV.

Otherwise, this article should be changed or rewritten to accurately reflect the standard definition.

Bob Badour 15:05, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Operator features not sorting correctly.

When sorting the 'Operator features in programming languages' by 'Programmer-defined operator symbols'. It doesn't work. Haskell comes first (as Yes) then all the NOs then all the Yes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.102.31.114 (talk) 12:11, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Beating around the bush

Much of this article is slow to get to the point. Lots of repetition. Lots of word salad. Just one example: "The semantics of operators particularly depends on value, evaluation strategy, and argument passing mode (such as Boolean short-circuiting). Simply, an expression involving an operator is evaluated in some way, and the resulting value may be just a value (an r-value), or may be an object allowing assignment (an l-value)." What does 'particularly' add? What does it mean that semantics depends on value? What is evaluation strategy? What is argument passing mode WRT an operator? What about the second sentence is 'simple'? How did we get to r-value and l-value? What is the point of the whole passage? It's word salad: a bunch of jargon tossed together without much substance. ... I have edited it throughout to focus on the topic Stevebroshar (talk) 12:02, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Operator features in programming languages

The giant table (and section) should go. Not that it's wrong, but it's OR and overly techy. Stevebroshar (talk) 12:04, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Basic programming language construct

WRT "Basic programming language construct" for short description. That is more categorical than descriptive. Not wrong, but not very useful as a description since it applies to many other programming constructs as well. Consider, I am a human being but that's not a great description of me as there are billions of others matching that description. Stevebroshar (talk) 12:58, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What do the prefix, infix and postfix columns of the giant table mean?

Does a 'yes' mean that the language has at least one operator that falls into that category? If so, that seems low value. Stevebroshar (talk) 14:31, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]