Larry~ On 7/11/05, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 11:14:18AM +0200, Michele Dondi wrote: > : Hmmm... I am one of those who likes ./ more, instead. I mean, I _really_ > : like it! Thus, how about making '/' less meaningless, i.e. more > : meaningful, in more general situations?!? > > Um, do you have a specific proposal? Like maybe / can be applied as a > metaoperator to any binary operator to make it into a unary operator > with the left side implicitly $?SELF, or some such? Hmm... > > if ==/ 3 # if $?SELF == 3 > > could even extend it to postfix ops: > > ++/; # $?SELF++ > > However, it has several problems. First, "." isn't really a binary > operator, but the prefix of a postfix operator. Second, the / is > potentially ambiguous with a following pattern unless we require > space before termish /. Third, the / is psychologically in the wrong > place to stand in for something in front. Or to turn these on their > head, we've just made three good arguments for something like: > > if o == 3 > > and > > o++; > > I'm afraid that, while ./ is cute and visually distinctive, I find > I'm getting tired of its idiosyncracies. You shouldn't go out and > marry someone just because they're cute and visually distinctive. > Hooray for long engagements, and occasional disengagements.
Yay! I guess I will take this moment to resuggest @^ as a list of invocants and $^ =:= @^[0]. I like how the ^ kinda points you the right way, also visually distinctive and doesn't get in the way of $_... Matt -- "Computer Science is merely the post-Turing Decline of Formal Systems Theory." -Stan Kelly-Bootle, The Devil's DP Dictionary
