Simon Cozens wrote: > John Porter wrote: > > But they are inextricably bound by perl's parsing rules. > > Perl 5's parsing rules. I don't think Perl 6 *has* a parser just yet. As someone else said before me, Perl should not be changed Just Because We Can. Aspects which have proven usefulness and are deeply engrained in the Perl mindset should not be tampered with just because some recent convert finds them un-Algol-like. -- John Porter
- Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs David Grove
- Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs Branden
- The binding of "my" (Re: Closures and def... Nathan Wiger
- Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Closures... Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Closures... Branden
- Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Clos... John Porter
- Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Closures... John Porter
- Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Clos... Simon Cozens
- Re: The binding of "my" (Re: ... John Porter
- Re: The binding of "my" ... Johan Vromans
- Re: The binding of "my&qu... John Porter
- Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs John Porter