> > ($obj1, $obj2)->foo(@args);
>
> Is that merely sugar for:
>
> # errr, $_.foo(@args) ?
> $_->foo(@args) foreach($obj1, $obj2);
No. What you showed would be achieved with either a hyperoperation:
($obj1, $obj2)^.foo(@args);
or a superposition:
any($obj1, $obj2).foo(@args);
What I was proposing was that, since:
method foo ( $me : $big, $boy ) {...}
can be called via either of:
foo $obj: @args;
or:
$obj.foo(@args);
then, by analogy:
method foo ( $me, $again : $big, $boy ) {...}
should be able to be called via either of:
foo $obj1, $obj2 : @args;
or:
($obj1, $obj2).foo(@args);
> or is there something more interesting going on?
The latter. :-)
> Maybe we need a method call hyperoperator. I didn't just say that.
Since we already have a method call (non-hyper)operator, and since the
hyper-prefix will "hype" *any* operator, we already have a method
call hyperoperator:
# method call # method hyper-call
$obj.method(@args) --> @objlist^.method(@args)
> > PS: I'd just like to point out that people gasped in horror when
> > I presented this idea at YAPC::NA::2001 as part of the
> > (soon-to-be-released) Klingon binding of Perl. ;-)
>
> I'll add my own, now.
nuch SoH! bIQambogh DaqDaq qaHoH!
DamIan!
