Re: PROTOPROPOSAL FOR NEW BACKSLASH was Re: implied pascal-like"with" or "express"

[Nathan Torkington]

David L. Nicol writes:
> okay but we still have the hiding issue, in case we want it to

What's the hiding issue?  I must have missed that.

> $one{two}                     is $one\two
> $$one{two}{three}             is $one\two\three
> $$$one{two}{three}{four}      is $one\two\three\four

Your left hand side is, I think:

  $one->{two}{three}{four}

in a very complicated fashion.  I'm unsure this is what you meant.

> with %one\two {
>       push @\three\four, 5,6;
> }
> is clear and invulnerable.

Except that you often don't know the keys in advance, and so now
your code turns into:

  with %one\$keytwo {
    push @\$keythree\$keyfour, 5, 6;
  }

which is decided sub-clear.  The precedent of "if you're doing a hash
lookup, use {} around the key" is fairly well-ingrained in Perl.

Nat