Nathan Torkington wrote:
> John Porter writes:
> >     foo $= ( bar, quux );  # provide scalar context to both sides
> >     foo @= ( bar, quux );  # provide list context to both sides
> 
> I assume you've dropped this idea as well, given the argument that you
> would be dropping prefix symbols but creating a lot of new operators
> to do the same task?

Sure.  It was just an idea.

But who knows, maybe I'll take it up again some day... :-)

-- 
John Porter

Reply via email to