>>>>> "LW" == Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
LW> On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 12:14:35PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote: LW> : On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 02:08:31PM -0500, Patrick R. Michaud wrote: LW> : : Hmmm, then would $x.$j.2 then be equivalent to $x[$j-1][1] ? LW> : LW> : Ouch. LW> Maybe that's a good reason to switch from 1-based to 0-based LW> $<digit> vars. Not sure what that would do to the current $0 though. LW> Most of the time $/ can stand in for it, I guess, though s/.../$// LW> is visually problematic. We could maybe resurrect $&. or do what i mentioned, not allow mixing of the two styles of match access. i don't see any real win for mixing them. indexing into matched arrays will not be so common to deserve conflating the 0 and 1 based indexing as well as the notations. leave it with $1.1 and $1[0] as being the two styles. you must use literal integers with the former and it is 1 based. you can use any expressions with the latter and it is 0 based. by allowing $1[$j].1 you save only 1 char over $1[$j][0] and would cause major confusion IMO. uri -- Uri Guttman ------ [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------- http://www.stemsystems.com --Perl Consulting, Stem Development, Systems Architecture, Design and Coding- Search or Offer Perl Jobs ---------------------------- http://jobs.perl.org
