Re: RFC 168 (v1) Built-in functions should be functions

[Nathan Wiger]

Tom Christiansen wrote:
> 
> That's hardly the problem with indirect object syntax.  Besides
> what I just mentioned, there is the fact that it's acting in a
> fashion that you could call stronger than a unary operator in terms
> of precedence.

This is also mentioned in the RFC, although probably not clearly enough.

I also wasn't claiming to fix *the* problem, just *a* problem. If you
read the RFC, I think you'll see this opens doors to a lot of benefits.
It probably has to be fleshed out considerably, but I'm sure the people
on -subs will definitely be able to help there.

-Nate