pugs-comm...@feather.perl6.nl wrote:
Author: lwall
Date: 2009-11-19 05:34:29 +0100 (Thu, 19 Nov 2009)
New Revision: 29129
Modified:
docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod
Log:
[S04] as several folks have suggested, rename "blorst" to "blast"
I'm curious about this change. I quickly figured out that
I kinda like 'blorst'. The word makes me think of a warm stew on a cold
winter night. And I agree with the searchability advantage of 'blorst'
as well.
-'f
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 08:17, Thom Boyer wrote:
> I'm curious about the change from "blorst" to "blast." I quickly figured out
> that "blorst" was
> derived from "BLock OR STatement" (as S04 used to say: "In fact,
> most of these phasers will take either a block or a statement (known as
> a I in
rnacular)).
The best that I can figure for "blast" is "BLock And STatement." But using
AND
seems less correct to me. Furthermore, "blast" is less likely to google up
the results I need.
So, what exactly _is_ the derivation of "blast"?
------ Forwarded mess
pugs-comm...@feather.perl6.nl wrote:
Author: lwall
Date: 2009-11-19 05:34:29 +0100 (Thu, 19 Nov 2009)
New Revision: 29129
Modified:
docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod
Log:
[S04] as several folks have suggested, rename "blorst" to "blast"
Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod
==
Author: lwall
Date: 2009-11-19 05:34:29 +0100 (Thu, 19 Nov 2009)
New Revision: 29129
Modified:
docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod
Log:
[S04] as several folks have suggested, rename "blorst" to "blast"
Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod
=
