On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 10:05:55PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote: : On 11/17/05, Joshua Choi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: : > But what does that mean for =>'s signature? What type would be its : > first parameter? Would you call it "&infix:{'=>'}:(Bareword | Any, : > Any)" or something like that? And in any case, would you be able to : > use this autoquoting in or as a sub, operator, type, etc.? : : I think => gets special treatment from the parser; i.e. it is : undeclarable. It's probably not even declarable as a macro, since it : needs to look behind itself for what to quote.
Yes, it's basically a lookahead on the rule that parses a bare identifier, that is, one that is not "forced" by something to its left like $ or "sub". : And I think this is okay. For some reason, we are not satisfied if : "if" is undeclarable, but => being so is fine. I can't put my finger : on why I feel this way, though. How do you declare '.' in Lisp? :-) Larry