On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 03:11:12PM +0100, Michele Dondi wrote:
: On Mon, 14 Feb 2005, Michele Dondi wrote:
:
: >Speaking of which, while I think that methods on the implicit topicalizer
: >and the C<.=> assignement operator are indeed cool, I wonder if any
: >provision will be made for a convenient stand in for "whatever is on the
: >left side of an assignment operator", e.g.
:
: I got no answer... does this mean this is utter nonsense?
No, I just think the extra functionality would not be worth the mental
load of another pronoun. One problem is that it would not be at all
clear *when* you are referring to the left side. It's changing over
time, after all. But even if that were settled, it seems there are
several other ways to do the same thing, any of which might be more
understandable, especially if you can bind any lvalue to a name of
your choice, and make it an ordinary noun.
But rather than that, I suspect we'll see more use of constructs
where the object to be mutated ends up being the topic, as in:
some_complicated_lvalue() but= { .sortmyway(foo($_),bar($_)) }
which would presumably do the same as
my $noun is rw := some_complicated_lvalue();
$noun = $noun but { .sortmyway(foo($_),bar($_)) };
which presumably means something like
my $noun is rw := some_complicated_lvalue();
$noun = $noun.copy.=sortmyway(foo($noun),bar($noun));
Larry
