> > But on the other hand Larry could see the argumentation my way too, > that it should be possible to use <<= and >>= as bit shifters (looking > at it from the C heritage it is strange that & | ~ ^ operate on strings > as they were bitvectors, but the shift ops don't). So an unfortunate > murky corner of the dual (strings and numbers), err, trefoil (strings > and bitvectors and numbers), err, quatrefoil (byte strings and Unicode > strings and bitvectors and numbers) nature of Perl strings. > > How to solve this, if this is to be solved? *I* see as an ugly > asymmetry blemish, but since enraged hordes of people have not > ascended upon yes over all these years, I think I am in a minority, > and I can live with it. *IF* someone wants to fix this, maybe a pragma. > Or maybe borgify Bit::Vector :-)
How is the fixing of lexical pragmas progressing? If there were a working solution for that, I could implement a pragma for shifting of scalars as bitvecs. -- Jarkko Hietaniemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.iki.fi/jhi/ "There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'. It is 'dead'." -- Jack Cohen
