Larry Wall wrote:
Though actually, now that I think about it, the cascaded notation
in S12 is illegal according to S03, since "does" is classified as
non-chaining, which implies non-associative. Hmm. We'd have to make
it right associative somehow. Put it in with ** maybe?
Hmm.
Or leave it non-associative and force | or ; notation to keep things
crystal clear. The basic problem is that the declarational "does" has
a natural scope that it applies to, so it doesn't have to arbitrarily
limit its scope as a binary operator does.
Personally, I'd rather it be right-associative: if
class Foo is Bar does A does B { ... }
works, I'd expect
$x does A does B;
to work, too.
What trouble would we get into by moving "does" to the chaining
binaries priority (i.e., one step more restrictive than it currently
is)?
--
Jonathan "Dataweaver" Lang
