[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Larry Wall) writes:
> : I hope you're not buying any of this crap
> : about Perl 6 being more "regular" or removing the "inconsistencies" of
> : Perl 5. It simply isn't true.
>
> Hey, sounds like it'd make a great column. Go for it. I'll expect
> a little more than an argument by assertion, however.
You have a fair point; I'm sorry, I shouldn't scaremonger like that without
a better argument to back me up. I just see code like
~~ sub (@x) { map { _ => _ } @attrs x Inf ^, @x }
and get the screaming heaves.
I shall have to go away and try to find the alleged "regularities"
before I can refute them - the one that comes to mind immediately is
that braces always delimit closures. (Except when they force a
statement end by the newline rule.)
However hard it may be to believe, I'm not just saying this to be snarky; I
am excited by Perl 6 and want to see good things come out of it. I just want
to make sure that the various creative processes are kept in check. :)
--
Building translators is good clean fun.
-- T. Cheatham
