On Wed, 9 May 2001 09:47:56 -0400, John Porter wrote: >> Undecorated if for function calls and methods. And buolt-ins, of course. > >No, that's the situation already. David is proposing a change. > >> So what you're really saying is that references aren't really scalars, >> but their own type. Thus they need their own prefix. > >No, that does not follow. What he is proposing is that Perl6 would have a kind of variable that doesn't have a prefix. That isn't perlish IMO. We might just as well drop all prefixes. At least, that'd be consistent. -- Bart.
- what I meant about hungarian notation David L. Nicol
- Re: what I meant about hungarian notation David L. Nicol
- Re: what I meant about hungarian notation Matt Youell
- Re: what I meant about hungarian notation Bart Lateur
- Re: what I meant about hungarian notation Bart Lateur
- Re: what I meant about hungarian notation David L. Nicol
- Re: what I meant about hungarian notation John Porter
- Re: what I meant about hungarian notation Bart Lateur
- Re: what I meant about hungarian notation Dan Sugalski
- Re: what I meant about hungarian notation Simon Cozens
- Re: what I meant about hungarian notation Eric Roode
- RE: what I meant about hungarian notation David Grove
- Re: what I meant about hungarian notation David L. Nicol
- RE: what I meant about hungarian notation David Grove
- Re: what I meant about hungarian notation Matt Youell
- RE: what I meant about hungarian notation David Grove
- Re: what I meant about hungarian notation Bryan C . Warnock
- Re: what I meant about hungarian notation Bart Lateur