Ben Morrow wrote:
> However, I would much rather see a general syntax like
>
> (# ... )
> {# ... }
> [# ... ]
>
> with no whitespace allowed between the opening bracket and the #: this
> doesn't seem to conflict with anything. Allowing <# ... > in rules would
> also be nice.
That's rather elegant. It's no longer than the current embedded
comment syntax, and avoids the start-of-line issue. The only
complication arises when you prepend the brackets with a quote or
pseudo-quote character:
say q(# is this a string or a comment?); # DWIM -> string.
--
Jonathan "Dataweaver" Lang
