Charles Bailey wrote:
I'm concerned that the relevant precedent isn't just Perl5. The ?: spelling of the ternary is pretty deeply embedded in programming languages -- I'm hard pressed to think of a widely used language in the past 10-15 years that spells it differently (though that may say more about my experience than the universe of "widely used" languages). Put more practically, I don't think the issue is just moving people forward from Perl5; we need to think about whether it'll help or hinder users moving back and forth among several languages, or bringing familiarity with other languages to the process of learning Perl6.
In short, is C<:: ??> going to be Perl 6's C<< -> >>? Again, this presupposes that C<: ?> is a feasible option (i.e., doesn't conflict with anything important) now that we have whitespace disambiguation. If it isn't, then this whole line of reasoning is moot. So: Is it feasible? -- Jonathan "Dataweaver" Lang
