Erik Steven Harrison wrote:
> Is it just me or is the 'is' property syntax a little > too intuitive? Seems like everywhere I turn, the > proposed syntax to solve a problem is to apply a > property. That's because most of the problems we're discussing are solved by changing the semantics of a variable, subroutine, or class in some way, and C<is> properties are the way to do that in Perl 6. > And is the is/but distinction still around? Oh, yes. > Since but's proposal I've not seen any use of it, and > the distinction between a compile time and run time > property was somewhat hazy to me anyway, so I can't be > sure that it's dead or just of rare use. Of rare use (nice turn of phrase, BTW). C<is> is about changing the way a variable or sub operates, C<but> is about changing what a value means. We'll see much greater use of C<but> when people start developing new algorithms and programming idioms with Perl 6. Damian
