> Currently, > > foo->bar($baz) > > can be parsed either as C<<'foo'->bar($baz)>>, or as C<<foo()->bar($baz)>> > depending on how the symbol C<foo> was used on other places. The proposal > is to always choose the first meaning: make C<< -> >> autoquote the bareword > on the left. Here is a question: How does this relate to getting hashrefs and arrayrefs from functions? if ( want->{count} > 2 ) { return $one, $two } Will that be interpreted as: 'want'->{count} want()->{count} To be consistent, it should mean the first one. That is, the infix operator -> should always autoquote the bareword to the left. Am I correct in assuming that's what you meant? -Nate
- RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not suffer from the a... Perl6 RFC Librarian
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not suffer f... Michael G Schwern
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not suffer f... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not suff... John Porter
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not suffer f... John Porter
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not suff... Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not suffer f... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not suff... Ilya Zakharevich
- Why -> cannot autoquote the LHS (was Re: RFC 2... Nathan Wiger
- Accessing perl's command line switches Chaim Frenkel
- Re: Why -> cannot autoquote the LHS (was R... Glenn Linderman
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not suffer f... Ilya Zakharevich
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not suff... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not ... Ilya Zakharevich
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should ... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls sh... Ilya Zakharevich
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not ... Tom Christiansen