Luke Palmer wrote: > In Perl 5, > > my int ($one = 0, $two = 1, $three = 2); > > is a fatal error. I could argue for this to change, as to support > better readability (and it would). It's obvious WIM, so why doesn't > it DWIM (disclaimer: cannot be used as an argument for arbitrary > features. Is not a slogan. I repeat, is not a slogan. :) ?
The problem is that this couldn't work given the current semantics of the assignment operator. The "return-value" of an assignment is the lhs of the assignment, so my int ($one = 0, $two = 1, $three = 2); ends up becoming: my int (0,1,2); Which, of course, is a fatal error (partly because it doesn't make any sense). This is why stuff like: if (defined ($child = fork)) { } Works as expected. The point that I am trying to get at is: just because it is obvious WIM to a human reader doesn't mean that it will be easy for a compiler to figure out, especially when the rest of the language works a different way. List assignment is much easier to read anyways. Joseph F. Ryan [EMAIL PROTECTED] This message was sent using the Webmail System hosted by OARDC Computing Services -- http://webmail.oardc.ohio-state.edu:8080