On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 11:59:35AM -0700, Dave Whipp wrote: : Jonathan Lang wrote: : : >Close. I'm thinking "added functionality for semicolon alternatives" : >rather than the "replace the semicolon" stunt that Semi::Semicolons : >pulls. In particular, as long as there's no ambiguity between : >prefix:<?> and postfix:<?>, I think that it would be quite useful for : >postfix:<?> to act as a semicolon that additionally sets $_ equal to : >the expression's value, allowing for a pseudo-Prolog style of syntax : >(i.e., the code could include questions as well as declarations and : >instructions). : : A slightly tangental thought: is the behavior of C<given> with no block : defined? I.e. is
It would be illegal syntax currently. : given $foo { when 1 {...} }; : : equivalent to : : given $foo; : when 1 {...}; Both of these suggestions would seem to duplicate the existing construct: $_ = $foo; :-) Of course, now someone will argue that unary:<=> should assign to $_ by default, in which case we'd have to find a new interation operator... Larry