?? and !! could always return some kind of result object that boolizes to true or false.
Zev Audrey Tang wrote: > > 在 Jun 11, 2007 5:10 AM 時，Jonathan Lang 寫到： >> A variation of chaining associativity gets >> used, with the "chaining rule" being '$v1 op1 $v2 // $v1 op2 $v3' >> instead of '$v1 op1 $v2 && $v2 op2 $v3', as is the case for comparison >> chaining. > > But wouldn't that make: > > True ?? undef !! Moose; > > evaluate to Moose, instead of undef as we wanted? > > Cheers, > Audrey >
