Nathan Torkington wrote:
> Except that you often don't know the keys in advance, and so now
> your code turns into:
>
> with %one\$keytwo {
> push @\$keythree\$keyfour, 5, 6;
> }
>
> which is decided sub-clear.
Do either of those expressions make sense in terms of
references to something? If not, then syntactically we
are in the clear. They don't, because currently it makes
no sense to butt a reference up to the LHS of anything.
It isn't any less clear than, for instance
$fiename = "C:\$keythree\$keyfour"
So another edge state would be, the new backslash would not
work in direct intepolation situations. It would work inside
interperobale curlies though.
> The precedent of "if you're doing a hash
> lookup, use {} around the key" is fairly well-ingrained in Perl.
I don't care how "ingrained" the concept of wrapping the
field names in curlies is, I still think it sucks, and so does anyone
who arrives here after using a language where there is a character (which
is conventionally dot) between the record name and a field in it.
Dot in the above example code clearly parses into string-cat, and if you
try hat Damian Conway descends on you like a herd of koalas.
We've run out of symbols on our keyboards, we'll have to start reusing
some of them.
--
David Nicol 816.235.1187 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
My argument is the result of selectively breeding straw men
and selectively killing them off
