Aaron Sherman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 13:01, Jonathan E. Paton wrote: > >> I'm I beating this point to death, or do I have to write >> the RPC: >> >> "Keep the {} and [] notation for hashes and arrays" >> >> or >> >> "Save our array!" > > Let's boil this RFC down to one short phrase: > > If {} goes away in Perl6, then everything you've heard about Perl6 being > "not really all that different from Perl5" is either a lie or a damned > lie. People keep saying "it's just Perl5, but instead of syntax X, you > now use syntax Y". Well, as both X and Y lists grow longer.... > > I know this is harsh, but really folks, you're pulling Perl apart > looking at a half-dozen good features and building a new language around > them. I don't fault you for this (it's a great way to come up with a new > language), but I'm beginning to get the feeling that going from Perl5 to > Perl6 is going to be almost the same level of effort as going from > Pascal to ANSI C! > > Also, just wondering: > > $_[_][EMAIL PROTECTED] _=_0_-_ > > does that work the way I expect it to?
Dunno, what do you expect it to do?. To my way of thinking there's going to be a syntax error at the third '_'. But I'm not entirely certain of that. -- Piers "It is a truth universally acknowledged that a language in possession of a rich syntax must be in need of a rewrite." -- Jane Austen?