On 5/5/01 3:28 PM, Larry Wall wrote: > I expect the real choice is between <$FOO and <$FOO>. I can convince > myself pretty easily that a unary < is just another name for "next", or > "more", or something. Yeah, but it looks like "previous"! ;) > maybe I should hold out for «» meaning qw() eventually. Ick. > Well, that's enough brainwracking for the moment. Gloria is making me > go eat something... Bread and water until Apocalypse 33 is done? ;) -John
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Michael G Schwern
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns David L. Nicol
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Larry Wall
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Nathan Wiger
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Graham Barr
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Dan Sugalski
- Re[2]: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns A. C. Yardley
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Nathan Wiger
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Larry Wall
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns David L. Nicol
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns John Siracusa
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Richard Proctor
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Nathan Wiger
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns David L. Nicol
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Uri Guttman
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns John Porter
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Bryan C . Warnock
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Simon Cozens
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Peter Scott
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Bart Lateur
- Re: Apoc2 - <STDIN> concerns Jarkko Hietaniemi