On 5/14/07, Daniel Hulme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 02:29:11PM -0700, Jonathan Lang wrote:
> 2. This brings up the possibility of custom-designed termination
> operators.
cf. Semi::Semicolons.
Close. I'm thinking "added functionality for semicolon alternatives"
rather than the "replace the semicolon" stunt that Semi::Semicolons
pulls. In particular, as long as there's no ambiguity between
prefix:<?> and postfix:<?>, I think that it would be quite useful for
postfix:<?> to act as a semicolon that additionally sets $_ equal to
the expression's value, allowing for a pseudo-Prolog style of syntax
(i.e., the code could include questions as well as declarations and
instructions).
--
Jonathan "Dataweaver" Lang
