On 4/23/01 3:25 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
> : >From a trainer's point of view, having two operators which look very
> similar, : are used for the same thing in various different languages, and do
> *almost* : the same thing but not quite, is completely *asking* for confusion.
>
> So teach 'em :=, and outlaw = with some kind of stricture. That'll
> save a heap of newbie confusion with == too. The = would only be there
> for compatibility anyway, when you want an old-fashioned Perl
> assignment that attempts to dwim the list/scalar context.
Then why not use = to do what you want := to do, and make := do what the
Perl 5 = does? Poor, confused Perl 5 programmers, I know. But if the ":=
functionality" is the common case for Perl 6, why make everyone type := all
over the place when they could be typing = ?
> And I don't care if it looks like Pascal, so don't try that argument. :-)
I'm just trying to save a (chorded!) keystroke in every assignment... :)
-John
