Re: RFC 138 (v1) Eliminate =~ operator.

2000-08-23 Thread Larry Wall
Mark-Jason Dominus writes: : It may turn out that the new notation really does have exactly the : same ambiguities, but that's not clear to me now. All I said was that : I would like to see some discussion of it. Operator vs term processing would presumably treat any initial / as it does now (in

Re: RFC 138 (v1) Eliminate =~ operator.

2000-08-23 Thread Larry Wall
Steve Fink writes: : Despite all that, I don't have strong feelings about this RFC. I just : thought it would be an interesting idea to bring to Larry's eyes. Well, the fact is, I've been thinking about possible ways to get rid of =~ for some time now, so I certainly don't mind brainstorming in t