Thus it was written in the epistle of [EMAIL PROTECTED],
>
> > I do *NOT* think in any way that default Perl 6 should ever require a my().
>
> I should probably add here that if this is what you think, you are
> certainly doomed to be disappointed, becapse Perl 5 requires my() in
> many cases, and this is not going to go away.
>
> For example, there is no way to write this without my():
>
> $x = 2;
> if (...) {
> my $x = 1;
> ...
> }
> print "$x\n";
>
> So I think it might be prudent for you to moderate your demands a little.
While I'm not yet prepared to advocate any of the suggestions, *if* lexicals
were the default, the above code could be written:
$x = 2;
if (...) {
$x = 1;
...
}
print "$x\n";
Could it not?
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
==========================================================
The bottom line for mathematicians is that the architecture has to be right.
In all the mathematics that I did, the essential point was to find the right
architecture. It's like building a bridge. Once the main lines of the
structure are right, then the details miraculously fit. The problem is the
overall design.
-- Dyson, Freeman
==========================================================
Deep thoughts to be found at http://www.southern.edu/~ashted
