On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Jon Lang <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ben Morrow wrote:
> > However, I would much rather see a general syntax like
> >
> > (# ... )
> > {# ... }
> > [# ... ]
> >
>
a preceding ':' (colon) makes it *notionally*
a null-label-block-comment-construct.
>
> > 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
>
