Perl6 RFC Librarian writes:
> An inconsistency between "C" and "<>" bugs me: "C" means
> "C" so it seems like "<>" should mean "C<$_ = > <>".
> I can't yet think of code that this extension would break.
I assume you mean that <> in void context should assign to $_?
Any code that has set $_, the
> An inconsistency between "C" and "<>" bugs me: "C" means
> "C" so it seems like "<>" should mean "C<$_ = > <>".
> I can't yet think of code that this extension would break.
>
> Would this have an advantage in making the
>
> while( <> ) {
> }
>
> syntax less magical?
You should probably ch
> $_ is the default variable for some operations.
> Some other operations might benefit from similar use of
> $_ to reduce clutter.
This, as a general principle, sounds good.
> An inconsistency between "C" and "<>" bugs me: "C" means
> "C" so it seems like "<>" should mean "C<$_ = > <>".
> I
On 13 Sep 2000, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
> An inconsistency between "C" and "<>" bugs me: "C" means
> "C" so it seems like "<>" should mean "C<$_ = > <>".
> I can't yet think of code that this extension would break.
Minor formatting nit: modern pod parsers accept not only C<> but also
C<<>>,
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
More defaulting to C<$_>.
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Kenneth C. Rich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 12 Sep 2000
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 215
Version: 1
Status: Developing
