Re: Re[2]: Whitespace (Was: [RELEASE] Pugs 6.2.9 released!)

2005-08-04 Thread Carl Franks
>  > why do we have to give up a space when calling functions under Pugs?
> 
>  >> Not sure whether it's enough of an answer, but see:
>  >> http://dev.perl.org/perl6/doc/design/syn/S04.html#Statement_parsing
> 
> it says:
> 
> if $term ($x)   # syntax error (two terms in a row)
> 
> if this cause an error, why not treat '$term ($x)' as a function call.
> At least when $term is not some abstract variable but valid name of simple
> function.

(I have nothing to do with the design process, so this is just my take on it)...

I get the impression that driving these sort of decisions, is the
historical problem we've had with only `perl` being able to parse
Perl.
Syntax is getting tightened up a little, with the result that perl6
programs are much more easily read, with the intention of allowing
different compiler implementations.

Also, we can only know if $term contains a valid subroutine name at
runtime, and perl6 aims to allow very separate compilation and runtime
phases (and syntax errors need to be figured out at compilation time).

Carl


Re[2]: Whitespace (Was: [RELEASE] Pugs 6.2.9 released!)

2005-08-04 Thread Andrew Shitov

> why do we have to give up a space when calling functions under Pugs?

>> Not sure whether it's enough of an answer, but see:
>> http://dev.perl.org/perl6/doc/design/syn/S04.html#Statement_parsing

it says:

if $term ($x)   # syntax error (two terms in a row)


if this cause an error, why not treat '$term ($x)' as a function call.
At least when $term is not some abstract variable but valid name of simple
function.

--
___
Andrew, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___