From: "Larry Wall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Eric Roode" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 11:03 AM
Subject: Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns
> Eric Roode writes:
> : And, while I'm on my soapbox here, I don't get how <...> is a vast
> : improvement over qw<...>. :-)
> Please pardon my hyperbole. I don't loathe qw() so badly that I want
> to get rid of it. I merely want to put it in the same status as the
> other general quote operators that also have a non-general pair of
> standard quote characters. I would feel the same about qq// if there
> weren't a "".
Might I suggest, then, that instead of making <foo bar> a synonym for
qw<foo bar>, we use it for iterators, and use <<foo bar>> (by which I mean
the "<" character twice, not the « character -- though probably either
should
work).
That lets us keep <foo> for somthing iteratorish, which saves
special-caseing (I do occasionaly use a qw list with one element),
and lets us keep continuity.
Anyway, I'm fairly certian that I'll use iterators more then qw lists.
-=- James Mastros
