> On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 05:48:59PM +1000, Damian Conway wrote: > : But that's only the opinion of one(@Larry), not of $Larry. > > Let's go 0-based and make $0 =:= $/[0] so that $/[] is all the parens. > Our old $0 (P5's $&) could be $<> instead, short for $<MATCH> or some > such.
Why can't bare $/ just striingify to the whole match? > It's already the case that p5-to-p6 is going to have a *wonderful* > time translating $7 to $1[2][0]... Not a real problem. Patrick has already said that his plan is that :p5 REs will return a match object with an already flattened match list using perl5 left peren counting semantics. > I wonder how much call there will be for a rule option that uses P6 > syntax but P5 paren binding with "push" semantics. Just add a :flat -- Mark Biggar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
