Firstly, thanks for writing the message out so clearly that it cannot be
misunderstood.
Damian Conway skribis 2005-05-14 22:06 (+1000):
> .{width} //= 80;
> .{height} //= 24;
> .{gutter} //= 4;
> .{justification} //= 'left';
> .{available} = .{width} - .{gutter}
> .{size} = .{width} * .{height};
Did something recently happen to .{} with regards to quoting, or did you
forget '' (or to use <>) here?
> Now, personally, I would like to see a short-cut for *both* types of
> method call, but if we can't have that (if only for the lack of
> spare punctuation) then I really think we have to go with the more
> general form.
^ would not clash. Yes, ^ has uses already, but none in this position:
* &infix:<^^>, high prec xor
* &infix:<+^>, &infix:<~^>, &infix:<?~>, bitwise xor
* &prefix:<+^>, &prefix:<~^>(, &prefix:<?^>??), bitwise negation
It does mean you need whitespace for simple things like ^foo + ^bar,
which I think is a loss, especially because .foo+.bar does work.
There's probably a reason why bare method() can't work, but I can't
think of one at this moment.
> the default chompee of a C<chomp>
chompee. Heh. That sounds funny :)
Juerd
--
http://convolution.nl/maak_juerd_blij.html
http://convolution.nl/make_juerd_happy.html
http://convolution.nl/gajigu_juerd_n.html
