That said, I have mixed feelings about the idea. I am thoroughlyBut I really hate the idea of removing `...` and leaving qx/.../. That would leave qx// in the unenviable position of being the only "quote-like operator" that doesn't have a corresponding quote-like syntax. After all, the only real point of having qx[], qx(), qx{}, qx//, et. al. is so you can get the effect of `...` without having to quote your backticks.
convinced that ` can leave it's current job. Removing qx// would be
going a leap too far.
Well, maybe that's not the only point. Some people really prefer bracketing punctuation marks that are reflections of each other.
I am not particularly fond of the idea of abolishing the established role of `...`. Nor do I like the %hash`keyval syntax; it gives me the "Eat at $joe's" willies. But *please* either keep *both* of qx// and `...`, or eliminate *both* of them. Either one without the other doesn't make much sense to me.
In defense of `...`, I suspect it is used most heavily in one-liners at a command prompt -- where saving keystrokes is most important, and where its uses aren't cataloged anywhere (so my suspicions can't be easily verified or falsified).
However, I really do like the idea of having a special syntax for %hash{'keyval'}. As I've said, I don't like ` for the purpose. But OTOH, I don't have any better suggestion for a syntax. Except to point out that if you're frequently accessing a hash via constant strings, you're probably using it like a record. And in Perl 6, that's better spelt as $obj.keyval.
=thom Smile, they said, it could be worse. So, I did... And it was.
