From: John Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Garrett Goebel wrote:
> > Would it be possible to expand the function prototypes so
> > that a function could be defined to take a loop block
> > instead of a code block?
>
> Might be easier to do what I suggested, and unify the two
> types of blocks.
Sounds like an RFC waiting to happen.
Unify "code", "loop", and "bare" blocks, so that they can all be
short-circuited with C<next>, C<last>, C<redo>.
However it still doesn't answer how you are able to:
return $true and next;
return $false and next;
return $true and last;
return $false and last;
return $true and redo;
return $false and redo;
How about adding an optional expression to C<next>, C<last>, and C<redo>?
Something that would allow for the following combinations:
next REAL_LABEL $true;
next REAL_LABEL $false;
next REAL_LABEL;
next $true;
next $false;
next;
Garrett
