Thank you for your insults, you really show the merit of your suggestion when you:
a.) Disregard all facts I state and just dismiss them
b.) Resort to insult as the only method to get your message across
c.) Make up facts (e.g. $or can't be "chained")
d.) Assume your interpretation of things is the only correct interpretation.
Furthermore, I notice that only I am "fighting" you, well first off I'm not fighting, if I were fighting you I'd be calling you names and insulting you, whereas in reality you are the only one doing this. And when you say it's just me, well thats just wrong. Rich clearly pointed out that your argument that $or can't be chained (which is untrue) is also irrelevant since & can't be chained either. However when you commented on the fact that & isn't generally chained, you didn't say "Rich you're a loser" however when I point out reasons why it shouldn't be implemented, you do call me a "loser". Furthermore, your response to Rich is invalid. You say:
if (bit & (bit | bit | bit)) well guess what? Thats invalid! mIRC doesn't allow you to use an operator on a subexpression. Try it and see:
//echo -a $iif(1 & 1,$true,$false) [returns $true]
//echo -a $iif(1 & (1),$true,$false) [returns $false]
You can't use a subexpression as an operand to another operator, therefore your rebuttal of Rich's argument is not in support of implementing a |, it is in support of using $or since $or could be used in such a manner, i.e.:
if ($and(bit,$or(bit,$or(bit,bit)))) Thats valid, and as I said:
if (bit & (bit | bit | bit)) is not.
I hope when Khaled looks at the forums, sees your suggestions, he doesn't do the same things you do, that instead he recognizes the fact that this can already be FULLY done using $or, and that | already has a use, therefore leading to ambiguity in the parser and confusion amongst users, and that your examples for possible uses do not even work in the scope of mIRC's scripting language.
