Graham Barr wrote: > The other choice is not to have a concat operator but instead have > C<concat LIST>, but I guess not many people would like that either. sub concat(@) { join '', @_ } Seems to me like the sort of thing that ought to be in the core. -- John Porter
- Re: Strings vs Numbers (Re: Tying & Overloading) Bart Lateur
- Re: Strings vs Numbers (Re: Tying & Overloading) John Porter
- Re: Strings vs Numbers (Re: Tying & Overloadi... David L. Nicol
- Re: Strings vs Numbers (Re: Tying & Overloading) Branden
- Re: Strings vs Numbers (Re: Tying & Overloadi... John Porter
- Re: Strings vs Numbers (Re: Tying & Overloading) Nathan Wiger
- Re: Strings vs Numbers (Re: Tying & Overloadi... John Porter
- Re: Strings vs Numbers (Re: Tying & Overloading) Larry Wall
- Re: Strings vs Numbers (Re: Tying & Overloadi... Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: Strings vs Numbers (Re: Tying & Overloading) Graham Barr
- Re: Strings vs Numbers (Re: Tying & Overloadi... John Porter
- Re: Strings vs Numbers (Re: Tying & Overloading) Russ Allbery
- Re: Strings vs Numbers (Re: Tying & Overloadi... Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: Strings vs Numbers (Re: Tying & Overloading) Bart Lateur
- Re: Strings vs Numbers (Re: Tying & Overloading) John L. Allen
- Re: Strings vs Numbers (Re: Tying & Overloading) Michael G Schwern
- Re: Strings vs Numbers (Re: Tying & Overloading) Edward Peschko
- Re: Strings vs Numbers (Re: Tying & Overloadi... Edward Peschko
- Re: Strings vs Numbers (Re: Tying & Overloading) Michael G Schwern