Re: C as a "junction" operator

[Dave Whipp]

Damian Conway wrote:

> Yes, but will it junctify them con-, dis-, ab-, or in-junctively???

Probably most similar to injunctively. But sequentially. I had been thinking of something like this:

while (<DATA>)
{
print "matched $_" if $_ == for(1,2,3,4,5);
}
__DATA__
1
2
9
3
4
5

Like the old bistable operator, each instance of the loop would
maintain the current state of the sequence.

> There's still the issue of implicit serialization.
> Junctions...err...don't.

Perhaps you're right that this isn't really a junction; but its
not completely dissimilar, either. I used the term "junction" as
a frame of reference for the type of behavior I was thinking of.


> Besides, I don't think we need to sacrifice C<for> to achieve this
> behaviour. If ordered junctions are a useful concept (and I can see
> that they might well be), we can have them like so: [...]

I wasn't thinking of a sacrifice: just an adjustment of perception to integrate with pipelining.


Dave.