On Sat, Jul 01, 2006 at 03:31:52PM +0300, Markus Laire wrote: : On 7/1/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: : >+In particular, these forms disable the lookahead for an adverbial : >argument, : >+so while : >+ : >+ q:n($foo) : >+ : >+will misinterpret C<$foo> as the C<:n> argument, : >+ : >+ qn(stuff) : >+ : >+has the advantage of misinterpreting it as the argument to the C<qn()> : >+function instead. C<:)> : >+ : >+But parens are special that way. Other bracketing characters are special : >+only if they can be mistaken for adverbial arguments, so : >+ : >+ qn[stuff] : >+ : >+is fine, while : >+ : >+ q:n[stuff] : >+ : >+is not. Basically, just don't use parens for quote delimiters, and always : >+put a space after your adverbs. : : Why q:n[stuff] is not fine? Shouldn't that pass [stuff] to adverb n?
That's what it does. But it's not fine if you expected [...] to delimit the quoted string instead. : Also, in what way are parens special? : Doesn't qn(stuff) and qn[stuff] both mean same thing? Nope, qn(stuff) is always a function call. q(foo) is always a function call, not a quote. : And both q:n(stuff) and q:n[stuff] pass something to adverb n. (First : passes stuff, second passes [stuff]) That is correct. My intent with the quote declarator however is that there be an implicit space after it, so the n on the end of qn no longer functions as an adverb, at least in terms of looking for a subsequent argument. I will attempt to clarify the distinction between quotes and ordinary macros. Thanks. Larry
