Ed Peschko wrote:
Larry Wall writes:
I think decent formatting would make it clearer:
for @a; @b
-> $x is rw; y {
$x = $y[5];
}
But this isn't very scalable:
Sure it is. You just have to think more two-dimensionally...
for @a; @b; @c; @d; @e
-> $a_variable1 is rw, $a_variable2 is rw;
$b_variable is rw;
$c_variable is rw;
$d_variable is rw;
$e_variable1 is rw, $e_variable2 is rw
{
}
:-)
BTW, Both Larry and I do understand the appeal of interleaving
sources and iterators. We did consider it at some length back
in January, when we spent a week thrashing this syntax out.
Of course, I can't speak for Larry, but in the end I concluded
that interleaving iterator variables is a false win, since it
trades reduced syntactic complexity for increased semantic
complexity, but only really improves the readability of a
comparatively rare case.
Damian
