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

[Peter Scott]

At 08:19 AM 8/8/00 +1000, Jeremy Howard wrote:
>John Porter wrote:
> > Has anyone suggested '*'?  Since its use for typeglobs is (repsumably)
> > going away, it's available (right?).
> >
> > It the "wildcard" mnemonic value is consistent with "placeholder".
> >
>Yes, it's been suggested, but we might be too late on that one--another RFC
>suggests reserving '*' for reserved perl identifiers.

Lord no - there's nothing wrong with contradictory RFCs.  These are just 
ideas, we're not making the decisions here.

--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies