Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Yes, it's possible to have two routines with the same name which > differ by signature... however, in Perl 6, C<for> has only one > signature, and it's the one above. The C<for> loop you are thinking > of is spelled C<loop>, Oh, yes, forgot about that.
> To the contrary, C<while> and C<if> take only a single expression in > scalar context, whereas C<for> takes a list in flattening list > context. *light dawns* That's what I get for trying to start reading in the middle of a thread, I guess. > > Methinks that a signature should be able to call for a code block > > in braces, and when it's called the signature after that code > > block should be optional. > > You mean s:2nd/signature/semicolon/ ? Yes, that was a thinko. I thought I typed semicolon there. > This has already been discussed at length. The answer is "um". :-) I see. > So far documented, the semicolon is only optional when the closing > brace is the only thing on the line. Don't worry, Larry's got a > handle on this one, and I don't think it needs further discussion. Cool. > > Fooey, English is weird, let's stick with Perl. > > Hmm, that last quote seems a little odd when placed next to your > signature... :-) What, my little pathetic attempt at a JAPH? It's only even slightly hard to follow if you don't understand closures. Nothing like some of the clever monstrosities I've seen floating around on the net. -- $;=sub{$/};@;=map{my($a,$b)=($_,$;);$;=sub{$a.$b->()}} split//,"[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ --";$\=$ ;-> ();print$/