fix docstrings for & and |

[tpapp]

The header of the docstring for & and | suggest a call syntax that is invalid (either needs ()s, or be infix). This is a trivial fix for that.

Issue noted here:

https://discourse.julialang.org/t/ampersand-operator-not-consistent-with-help/34266

[MasonProtter]

Is it worth mentioning in the doc-string that one can do (&)(x, y) and (|)(x, y)?

[tpapp]

@MasonProtter: that is generic information about using infix operators as prefix syntax, so I don't think we should mention it in specific docstrings.

Incidentally, I noted that many operators have this problem in docstrings (eg +, -), I wonder if they should be fixed in general.

[fredrikekre]

Incidentally, I noted that many operators have this problem in docstrings (eg +, -), I wonder if they should be fixed in general.

But they work:

julia> +(1, 2)
3

The difference seems to be that & doesn't parse to a :call without the parenthesis. | actually work though:

julia> |(true, false)
true

(but the proposed change looks better anyway IMO).

[GunnarFarneback]

Parsing of &: #34693

[MasonProtter]

That is generic information about using infix operators as prefix syntax, so I don't think we should mention it in specific docstrings.

As Fredrik pointed out, the fact that you can't do &(a, b) but can do (&)(a, b) is a bit of an oddity among the infix operators, that might make it worth mentioning in its docstring.

[kshyatt]

Test on freebsd failed in SuiteSparse.