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

[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 the absence of mandatory m//), so that's not a problem as
far as I can see.  But for linguistic reasons I don't think putting the
regex in front of the variable is a good idea.  I already regret putting
the class as the second argument of bless.

Larry