> > No thanks. Suppose I want: > > > > '$x = $a; > > $y = func(\I$arg1, $arg2, $arg3\E); > > Hmmm...should \Ifunc($arg1)\E be replaced by the return value of > func($arg1)? I don't think so. I think \I..\E should just impose qq{..} semantics on the text in between. So you'd still write: "......\I${\func($arg1)}\E......" or "......\I@{[func($arg1)]}\E......" Damian
- RFC 226 (v2) Selective interpolation in single quotish... Perl6 RFC Librarian
- Re: RFC 226 (v2) Selective interpolation in singl... Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: RFC 226 (v2) Selective interpolation in singl... Damian Conway
- Re: RFC 226 (v2) Selective interpolation in s... Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: RFC 226 (v2) Selective interpolation in s... Damian Conway
- Re: RFC 226 (v2) Selective interpolation ... Uri Guttman
- Re: RFC 226 (v2) Selective interpolation ... Damian Conway
- Re: RFC 226 (v2) Selective interpolat... Glenn Linderman
- Re: RFC 226 (v2) Selective interpolation in singl... Glenn Linderman
- Re: RFC 226 (v2) Selective interpolation in s... Philip Newton
- Re: RFC 226 (v2) Selective interpolation in s... Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 226 (v2) Selective interpolation in singl... Philip Newton
- Re: RFC 226 (v2) Selective interpolation in singl... Andy Dougherty
- Re: RFC 226 (v2) Selective interpolation in s... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 226 (v2) Selective interpolation ... Steve Fink