After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 135065 - Logical OR
Logical OR
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: gnome-calculator
Classification: Core
Component: general
unspecified
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: Rich Burridge
Rich Burridge
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2004-02-21 20:23 UTC by Paisa Seeluangsawat
Modified: 2004-12-22 21:47 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Attachments
Fix for the problem. (1.13 KB, text/plain)
2004-03-28 23:07 UTC, Rich Burridge
Details

Description Paisa Seeluangsawat 2004-02-21 20:23:35 UTC
In scientific mode, the tooltip for OR is "Logical OR" even thought it does
bitwise-OR.  Same for AND, NOT, XOR, XNOR.  I'm not sure if this is
intentional or an oversight, so I just file a report anyway.
Comment 1 Rich Burridge 2004-02-22 01:44:36 UTC
Adding Breda, who is my doc writer for her
definitive statement on what (if anything)
should be done here.
Comment 2 Breda McColgan 2004-02-23 12:26:52 UTC
I must admit that I'm not a programmer, so I wasn't aware of the
difference between logical operators and bitwise operators. However,
I've now done a little research, and I think that Paisa is correct,
judging by the following examples from
http://uhaweb.hartford.edu/jmhill/suppnotes/creview/opening.htm:

Example 1: OR
=============

0x0C | 0x0A = 0x0e  
0x0C || 0x0A = 0x01

| is bitwise OR; || is logical OR
In gcalctool, 0C Or OA = E  ==> gcalctool Or is bitwise OR.



Example 2: AND
==============

0x0C & 0x0A = 0x08  
0x0C && 0x0A = 0x01

& is bitwise AND; && is logical AND
In gcalctool, 0C And OA = 8  ==> gcalctool And is bitwise AND.


Conclusions:
============

* Rich needs to update the tooltips to replace "Logical" with
"Bitwise".

* Breda needs to update the manual likewise.


Well spotted, Paisa :)

Comment 3 Rich Burridge 2004-02-23 15:26:42 UTC
Thanks Breda.

Note that if we want to do this for GNOME 2.5/6, we need
to submit an exception request *immediately*. The strings
freeze has already been and gone. My feeling is this can
wait until GNOME 2.7/8. Breda, what would you recommend?
Comment 4 Breda McColgan 2004-02-23 15:31:40 UTC
Um, actually Rich, I think you're best placed to make that decision:)
Is it likely that any users are going to be very inconvenienced by the
fact that they think they are performing a logical operation but in
fact are performing a bitwise operation?
Comment 5 Rich Burridge 2004-02-23 15:41:38 UTC
Well Paisa is the first person to discover/mention
this so I'm not sure if it's not a popular feature
or folks are confused by it. I'd say lets leave it 
open and let's fix it for GNOME 2.7/8. Paisa, is
that okay with you? If so, I'll remove the GNOME 2.5
keyword.
Comment 6 Paisa Seeluangsawat 2004-02-24 03:57:26 UTC
Agree that this can wait :-).
Comment 7 Rich Burridge 2004-03-28 23:07:57 UTC
Created attachment 26037 [details]
Fix for the problem.
Comment 8 Rich Burridge 2004-03-28 23:14:25 UTC
Changes checked into CVS HEAD. I've bumped the version
number in configure.in to 4.4.1.

Breda, I will also open a new placeholder gcalctool bug
(assigned to you), for documentation work (such as updating
the online help).