Luke Palmer wrote:
> In Perl 5,
>
> my int ($one = 0, $two = 1, $three = 2);
>
> is a fatal error. I could argue for this to change, as to support
> better readability (and it would). It's obvious WIM, so why doesn't
> it DWIM (disclaimer: cannot be used as an argument for arbitrary
> features. Is not a slogan. I repeat, is not a slogan. :) ?
The problem is that this couldn't work given the current semantics of
the assignment operator. The "return-value" of an assignment is the
lhs of the assignment, so
my int ($one = 0, $two = 1, $three = 2);
ends up becoming:
my int (0,1,2);
Which, of course, is a fatal error (partly because it doesn't make any
sense). This is why stuff like:
if (defined ($child = fork)) {
}
Works as expected.
The point that I am trying to get at is: just because it is obvious
WIM to a human reader doesn't mean that it will be easy for a compiler
to figure out, especially when the rest of the language works a
different way. List assignment is much easier to read anyways.
Joseph F. Ryan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
This message was sent using the Webmail System hosted by OARDC Computing Services --
http://webmail.oardc.ohio-state.edu:8080
