> From: Angel Faus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 00:54:09 +0200 > > All this ones fit more with the concept of "mystical analogy" hinted > by =~ than with the plain similarity that one would expect from > "like"
True. Can't say I like, um, like. > Oh, and =~ looks much more intimidating, which is good, given its.. > err.. power. I fancy ~ or ~~ at the moment. To me, =~ implies some sort of assignment, seeing as there's a single equal sign in it. =~= looks more like a comparison, but it's too ugly-prolog-like. Indeed, I like the I<concept> of out-of-place substitutions, and using ~= or ~~= (the duck) for in-place. Though, as pointed out, the in-place efficiency of such a thing would be hard to detect. But--that's for the practical perliticians to work out :) Luke
