From: "Nathan Wiger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 10:02 PM
Subject: Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns
> You know, I hear what you're saying, but it really makes the little hairs
on
> my neck stand up. Just imaging trying to teach this:
> $a = $b; # assignment or readline?
> It's really spooky. You're changing what = does, indeed what method it
calls
> (copy vs next), based on the contents of the variable. I'd much rather
have
> to do:
> $a = next $b;
I think that = should always be "get a value", and := should always be "get
the
thing itself". For normal things, the thing itself and it's value are the
same, so
:= is equivlent to =.
> Truthfully, I've always liked the <>'s (and personally don't think we need
a
> qw alternative), so I'd rather we stay with:
> $a = <$b>; # same as next $b or $b.next
> Hey, maybe we can convince Larry... ;-)
I'd tend to agree. Especialy that we don't need a qw() alternative.
However, I don't think Larry's in a convincable mood -- coughdotcough.
-=- James Mastros
