On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 12:32:29PM -0400, John L. Allen wrote:
:
: On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Graham Barr wrote:
:
: > On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 05:19:22PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: >
: > > At the moment I'm leaning toward ^ for concat, and ~ for xor. That
: >
: > I think that would lead to confusion too. In many languages ^ is
: > xor and ~ is a bitwise invert. It is that way in perl now too, so
: > perl is already quite standard in that area. Changing these just
: > to get . for -> so that we are more "standard" seems very strange
: > as you are loosing two standards to gain one.
: >
: > To be honest though I don't think it is possible to get a single
: > char concat operator with loosing something else, which is a shame.
: > It would be good if we could somehow overload + to be both string
: > and numeric, but I not sure that is possible.
:
: I think someone may have mentioned this already, but why not just say
: that if you want '.' to mean concatenation, you have to surround it on
: either side with white space? If there's no white space around it, then
: it is forced to mean method invokation, or whatever else. Sure, some
: japhs will break, but that's just too bad :-) Perl already
: has other cases where white space matters, why not one more. That way,
: perhaps we can all get what we want, namely that '.' means both
: concatenation _and_ method invokation.
No thanks. We already have the ability to put white space around '->'
which is helpfull a la Soap::Lite.
Besides, I can't think of instances where white space matters without
being except:
print <<__EOT__
__EOT__
which is easily avoidable via 'print <<" __EOT__"'.
--
Casey West
