"David L. Nicol" wrote:
>
> >
> > Consider the following syntax:
> >
> > my var; # declaring a scalar
> > my array[]; # declaring an array
> > my hash{}; # declaring a hash
>
> For the remainder of the enclosing block, the barewords var,
> array and hash are to be interpreted as references to a scalar, an
> array, and a hash.
I'm confused by this statement. Are you suggesting an alternative to
the original RFC? My point was supposed to be
that array[] makes more consistent sense that @array when refering to an
variable named 'array' of type 'array'. etc.
Using the @on the front to indicate the variable type in one place, and
as a context indicator in others creates confusion for lot of people.
>
> As long as assignment starts doing automatic dereferencing this
> will not be too tricky, it will require adding some work to C<my>
> and adding more barewords to the local bareword board.
>
> --
> David Nicol 816.235.1187 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Laziness with responsibility http://www.tipjar.com/kcpm
--
David Corbin
Mach Turtle Technologies, Inc.
http://www.machturtle.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
