Re: Different higher-order func notation? (was Re: RFC 23 (v1) Higher order functions)

[Nathan Wiger]

> $zot **= ^foo    # "what's that binary op doing there..
>                  # ..oh, that's a placeholder"

I think this is a valid way of looking at it. If you think about it, *
for typeglobs is the same symbol as * for multiplication. But the parser
can figure it out based on context. I don't see any reason why it
wouldn't be able to do the same for ^.

-Nate