Dan Sugalski writes: > I dunno. Color me unconvinced--I do use the <> enough in non-while context > (and in non-implied while context) to make the whole idea of next feel > rather... nasty. And $FOO.next? Yuck. Reading lines/records in is one of > the most fundamental things one can do in a computer language (especially > perl) and having to jump through OO hoops to do simple things just feels > like a step in the wrong direction. Conceptual elegance and orthogonality > are nice enough, but we have enough of those languages. (If I wanted > Eiffel, I know where to find it) Amen. /acy
- Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Nathan Wiger
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns David L. Nicol
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Simon Cozens
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Simon Cozens
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Larry Wall
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Nathan Wiger
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Larry Wall
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Nathan Wiger
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Dan Sugalski
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> conc... A. C. Yardley
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> conc... Nathan Wiger
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> ... Larry Wall
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> ... John Siracusa
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> ... Richard Proctor
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> ... Nathan Wiger
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> ... Uri Guttman
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> ... Bryan C . Warnock
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> ... Simon Cozens
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> ... Peter Scott
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> ... Nathan Wiger