Re: copying and s/// (was Re: Overlapping RFCs 135 138 164)

[Brad Hughes]

Nathan Wiger wrote:
[...]
> RFC 164 v2 has a new syntax that lets you do the above or, if you want:
> 
>    $this = s/foo/bar/, $that;
>    @these = s/foo/bar/, @those;
> 
> Consistent with split, join, splice, etc, etc.

I often use the comma operator like this

  s/foo/bar/, $n++ if $x;

If "s" is now a 2 parameter operator like split and
join, how is it parenthesized?

  s(/foo/bar/, $_), $n++ if $x;

in which case the parser/lexer may be looking for a subst of the
form s()(), or

  (s/foo/bar/), $n++ if $x;

which seems like "s" will be evaluated in list context, and
therefore will use @_ instead of $_.  My assumption here is that

  $x = s/foo/bar/;

defaults to

  $x = s/foo/bar/, $_;

and

  @x = s/foo/bar/;

defaults to

  @x = s/foo/bar/, @_;

although I may have missed something.