Dave Storrs writes:
>
>
> On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Angel Faus wrote:
>
> > Then let's make the parens required when there is more than one
> > stream.
> >
> > Sane people will put them there anyway, and it will force the rest of
> > us to behave.
> >
> > It also solves the ";"-not-a-line-seperator problem.
> >
> > -angel
>
>
> Yes! Thank you, this is perfect. Minimal disruption of the
> syntax Larry designed, minimal exception to remember, and it completely
> resolves all my issues. See, I knew there had to be a simple, elegant
> solution I was missing.
>
>
> --Dks
>
>
>
but this will make
for ( @a ; @b ) -> ( $x ; $y ) { ... }
to do not what you mean :
Because it is this :
for [@a] , [@b] -> $x ; $y { ... $x,$y are array refs here }
";" is dangerous because it impose scalar context on both sides.
by enclosing ( @a;@b) in () you "hide" @a;@b from grammar magic that
"for" is doing , so "for" do not know how to bind the streams to
closure args.
aracdi
