[doc] perlop: splitting of the section about 'or' and 'xor'

[rsFalse]

Where
https://perldoc.perl.org/perlop#Logical-or-and-Exclusive-Or

Description
I suggest to split this section into two. Reason is that 'or' differs from 'xor' significantly: 1) can/cannot short-circuit, 2) 'xor' returns Perl's TRUE or FALSE i.e. 1 or 0/'', and 'or' returns differently (LEFT: evaluated expression; RIGHT: (evaluated?)expression with context propagation from outside). These operators look similarly (and, or, xor), but 'xor' behaves differently. Splitting needed for emphasis of difference.

(This is almost a copy of my suggestions which I wrote earlier to perlmonks https://perlmonks.org/?node_id=11128119)

[jkeenan]

Where
https://perldoc.perl.org/perlop#Logical-or-and-Exclusive-Or

Description
I suggest to split this section into two. Reason is that 'or' differs from 'xor' significantly: 1) can/cannot short-circuit, 2) 'xor' returns Perl's TRUE or FALSE i.e. 1 or 0/'', and 'or' returns differently (LEFT: evaluated expression; RIGHT: (evaluated?)expression with context propagation from outside). These operators look similarly (and, or, xor), but 'xor' behaves differently. Splitting needed for emphasis of difference.

(This is almost a copy of my suggestions which I wrote earlier to perlmonks https://perlmonks.org/?node_id=11128119)

I don't really see the need for splitting up the documentation as the OP requests. However, I do think we need better documentation of xor. Here is the sum total of our documentation of this operator:

Binary C<"xor"> returns the exclusive-OR of the two surrounding expressions.
It cannot short-circuit (of course).

This documentation assumes you already know what "exclusive-OR" means. If you do not, the Perl documentation is of no help; you have to go out on the internet and search for it. In twenty years of writing Perl, I encountered xor exactly once in real production code, so I would have to undertake that search as well.

Could someone suggest appropriate documentation for this section?

Thank you very much.
Jim Keenan