On Sat, Apr 16, 2005 at 10:01:44PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: Larry Wall skribis 2005-04-16 11:08 (-0700):
: > : $foo ~~ /@{< [ ] { } < > : ++ $ . ? / +| +& ?| ?& >}/
: > Not unless you backwhack that internal > there.
: > [...]
: > @myfavoritepunctuations = < [ ] { } < \> : ++ $ . ? / +| +& ?| ?& >;
:
: Why isn't nesting allowed there? I'd expect it to work a bit like q<
: foo < > bar > in Perl 5, which equals "
: foo < > bar ".
Forgot about that. I guess we should talk about it. It's pretty obvious
what the benefits of doing it that way are. I only wonder if, in the
age of Unicode, it's going to get a little less clear what are actually
brackets and what aren't, unless you actually look up the properties.
But then, that constraint applies to openers and closers in general, so
maybe it's not an issue with respect to embedded openers and closers.
Okay, let's keep the P5 semantics, unless someone can think up a better
reason not to than I have.
Larry
