> And that's just too much punctuation for too little value.
>
> How special purpose is "with"? Do people envision using it *only* on
> hashes? (I did until this email) If so, I like Damian's version best:
>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/perl6-language@perl.org/msg02649.html
-Original Message-
From: Jonathan Scott Duff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 1:06 PM
To: David L. Nicol
Cc: Nathan Torkington; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PROTOPROPOSAL FOR NEW BACKSLASH is still Re: implied
pascal-like"with" or "express&quo
On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 12:45:06PM -0500, David L. Nicol wrote:
> with %container {
> ->$fieldname = $value;
> ${->destinationvaluename} = ->value_to_put_there
> }
Then I'd've expected that to have been:
with \%container {
->{$fieldname} = $value;
${->
Thanks, the actual effects of \ in doublequotes slipped my mind.
Nathan Torkington gracefully extolled:
> I'd be more receptive to something that reuses existing or similar
> Perl syntax (e.g., extend ->).
with %container {
->$fieldname = $value;
${->destinationvaluename}
