On 9/20/06, Aaron Sherman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Larry Wall wrote: > What we really need is a unary operator that is sugar for [,](=(...)). Just > don't anyone suggest *. :-)I was thinking about that. I wonder if [\] would make sense, or is that just begging to have in-editor parsers fall over screaming ;)
That would be quite close to [\+] [\,] etc.. from S03: S03> say [\+] 1..* # (1, 3, 6, 10, 15, ...) -- Markus Laire
