Nathan Wiger wrote:
>
> > >"Print this line.\n"<;
>
> Some questions:
>
> 1. How do you specify alternate filehandles to output to?
> select() doesn't count for the purposes of this question.
It's a shortcut, not a replacement. Rumors of select's death are
greatly exaggerated.
> 2. How do you support the list form of print, namely:
>
> print "Hello there ", $r->fullname, "!\n";
>"Hello there ", $r->fullname, "!\n"<;
It takes a list, not a string. (See below.)
> 3. Can you support here documents with this syntax?
I haven't thought about this yet, but you can always use print.
> 4. How does this nest within other perl statements, namely:
>
> print "Bob is ", $bob->color if $green;
> print $r->param($name) . " is on\n" unless $this;
>"Bob is ", $bob->color< if $green;
>$r->param($name) . " is on\n"< unless $this;
Unfortunately, the nesting rules get a little complicated. This is also
going to be an issue with RFC 51 (which is a much bigger win by the
way). One solution is to allow alternate quotes (p{Bob is ",
$bob->color}). Another solution is to fiddle with operator precedence.
> 5. How is this syntax a big win over the current print?
> The only difference I see is it's 3 characters shorter.
> I realize this is subjective, but a feature request
> should try to address a problem. What problem is there
> with the current print operator?
First repeat 10 times - "It's not a replacement, it's a shortcut."
Sorry, I should have made that more clear in the RFC. The core of the
suggestion is that it saves a few characters. Most of my programs have
print statements scattered around and I'd like to have a more compact
syntax.
Here's what I'm working on for v3: >LIST< should return LIST. In other
words, you can stick print operators just about anywhere:
my @file = map {s|/home/jericson/||; >$_<} glob '~/*';
or:
print $fh >"This also goes to stdout.\n"<;
Think tee(1).
Jon
--
Knowledge is that which remains when what is
learned is forgotten. - Mr. King
