# A Plea for Bit-Twiddlers! (please keep ! as logical negation, separate from bitwise negation!)

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/a-plea-for-bit-twiddlers-please-keep-as-logical-negation-separate-from-bitwise-negation/8297>\
**Category:** Internals & Design\
**Created:** [January 11, 2018, 9:56pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/a-plea-for-bit-twiddlers-please-keep-as-logical-negation-separate-from-bitwise-negation/8297 "2018-01-11T21:56:49Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 49

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ScottPJones](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/scottpjones/32/146_2.png) [@ScottPJones](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/ScottPJones)\
**Post date:** [January 14, 2018, 8:05pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/a-plea-for-bit-twiddlers-please-keep-as-logical-negation-separate-from-bitwise-negation/8297/49 "2018-01-14T20:05:13Z")

</div>

> [@cce](#):
>
> Personally, while it’s perhaps dead-on-arrival, I’d once again ask if and, or, and not could be added so that higher-level business logic programmers doing data analysis could avoid symbolic soup.

That would be part of my proposal ([A Modest Proposal (for !, &, | and ~)](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/a-modest-proposal-for-and/8330)), which is based on the proposal by @sacha ([explore fixing #5187 via and/or/xor/not and associated updating ops by Sacha0 · Pull Request #25180 · JuliaLang/julia · GitHub](https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/25180)). Note that when applied to boolean values, `and` and `or` would act as non-shortcircuiting logical operations (as do `&` and `|` currently), and `not(someboolean)` would act the same as `!someboolean`.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/a-plea-for-bit-twiddlers-please-keep-as-logical-negation-separate-from-bitwise-negation/8297)._