Re: RFC 84 (v1) Replace => (stringifying comma) with =>

[Chaim Frenkel]

Shades of LISP, batman.

<tongue in cheek>

I can see it now, the '=>' operator will be called cons-ing.

And the new keword for accessing a pair will be CAR and CDR.

</tongue in cheek>

Are the two values of a pair restricted in anyway? All your examples
were scalar. What about a plural whatzit or a reference to a plural
whatzit?

<chaim>

>>>>> "PRL" == Perl6 RFC Librarian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

PRL> =head1 ABSTRACT

PRL> This RFC proposes the introduction of a new data type -- the I<pair> -- and
PRL> the co-opting of the => operator to act as a pair constructor. Most existing
PRL> uses of => would be preserved.


PRL> =head1 DESCRIPTION

PRL> The first component of a pair would be called its C<key>, and the second, it's
PRL> C<value>. It is proposed to either extend the semantics of C<keys> and
PRL> C<values> to allow them to operate of pair references, or else introduce
PRL> two new built-ins -- C<key> and C<value> -- to access the components of a pair.

-- 
Chaim Frenkel                                        Nonlinear Knowledge, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                                               +1-718-236-0183