Re: Tying & Overloading

[Dan Sugalski]

At 02:55 AM 4/24/2001 -0400, John Porter wrote:
>Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > It wouldn't be all that tough to change this if you were so inclined--it'd
> > certainly be a simpler parser modification than some others that have been
> > proposed.
>
>Yes, I hadn't thought of that.  Yay again.

The one downside is that you'd have essentially your own private language. 
Whether this is a bad thing or not is a separate issue, of course.

OTOH, it might not be inappropriate for there to be several variants of 
perl available with differing syntax. PL/I seemed to manage OK with 
something like this. (While PL/I is mostly dead, its death wasn't as a 
result of the varying subsets out there...)

                                        Dan

--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski                          even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                         have teddy bears and even
                                      teddy bears get drunk