--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Yesterday Aaron Crane wrote: > > > Jonathan Scott Duff writes: > > > > > @a `+ @b > > > > In my experience, many people actually don't get the backtick > > character at all. > > Yes. I think that might be a good reason _for_ using backtick in > vector > operators: > > * Backticks aren't used in any other operators, so they would not > be > mistaken for xor nor arrays. > > Backticks also look a little odd, so even if it isn't intuitive > as > to what is going on, somebody seeing a vector op for the first > time > should at least spot that _something_ different is happening. > > * People starting out in Perl wouldn't want to use vector ops > straight > away (there are enough other things to be learning). So a > character > that involves 'advanced' typing is used for an 'advanced' > feature.
This almost makes more sense than the ^[] stuff. But see below. > A pair of backticks could be used if the vector-equals distinction is > required: > > @a `+`= @b; > @a `+=` @b; Now it does make more sense. Use them as quotes, please, since that's the understood usage (and becase syntax highlighters know how to do this). I don't even mind if they keep the "dual use" of run-gather and vectorize. (They probably can't, since prefix ops would look like run-gathers.) @a = @b `+` @c; "let @a be the result of running PLUS with inputs @b and @c" Yeah! =Austin __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/
