John Siracusa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 4/23/01 4:16 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
> > What is it about . that seems to inspire allergic reactions in people?
> > Surely it's not the . itself, but the requirement that you fit everything
> > into that one syntactic mold. Perl's not going to do that.
>
> I don't mind it, but I always imagined:
>
> $obj->method();
> $obj.attribute;
Principle of uniform access says you really don't want to distinguish
those two if you can possibly help it..
>
> or something vaguely C-ish like that. And I think most Perl folks like the
> -> for class/object methods. It's a cute little arrow :) You'll have to
> make it very clear why . is a better fit for Perl 6 than -> Otherwise
> people will probably mourn the missing Mr. Pointy ;)
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
