Larry Wall writes:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 03:27:04PM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
> : On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 12:25:26AM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
> : > Of course not. &infix:<Y> refers to the infix Y operator, but you need
> : > the hashy subscript.
> :
> : So, what is the full name for the operator in the symbol table? :)
>
> %::{'&infix:<Y>'}, I suspect.
I suspect that's a bad idea. What about &infix:{'<'}?
Perhaps there is a %infix: (in every appropriate scope) that holds
anonymous symbol table references:
%{%infix:{'Y'}}
And:
%{%::{'%infix:'}{'Y'}}
We might make the table lookup smart enough to do the right thing, but
then again, that may be a bad idea:
keys %::; # doesn't return &infix:<Y>
Luke
