(/dks attempts to pour water.)
Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > And even if we do have both functional and methodical versions, this:
> >
> > @out <~ sort <~ map {...} <~ grep {...} <~ @a;
> >
> > is still clearer in its intent than:
> >
> > @out = sort map {...} grep {...} @a;
Mr. Nobody wrote:
> I find the normal function call and assignment far more readable than using
> some weird ugly operator.
Ok, but "weird" and "ugly" are personal opinions--that is, they are a
question of aesthetics, not language design, and aesthetics varies
from person to person. A lot of other people (myself included), seem
to find the ~> operator to be kinda cool. Is this a case where we
could just agree that TIMTOWTDI?
> > And the squiggly version is also reversible, for those who are more
> > comfortable with reading left-to-right.
> >
> > @a ~> grep {...} ~> map {...} ~> sort ~> @out;
>
> That's going to be just plain confusing. Arguments to functions are supposed
> to be on the right.
Don't think of it as a function call then. Think of it as a pipeline,
where data flows in the direction of the arrows.
> And what's up with using them for assignment? That's
> making them even more overcomplicated and ugly. Do you care about readability
> at all? It seems to me that ~> and <~ have no use except making perl 6 uglier
> and more complicated than it already is. They're completely unnecessary.
Now don't hold back on account of social niceties like not wanting to
cloud the issue with emotion or low-level ad hominem attacks. Tell us
what you _really_ think. :>
--Dks
