[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Larry Wall) writes: > : I hope you're not buying any of this crap > : about Perl 6 being more "regular" or removing the "inconsistencies" of > : Perl 5. It simply isn't true. > > Hey, sounds like it'd make a great column. Go for it. I'll expect > a little more than an argument by assertion, however.
You have a fair point; I'm sorry, I shouldn't scaremonger like that without a better argument to back me up. I just see code like ~~ sub (@x) { map { _ => _ } @attrs x Inf ^, @x } and get the screaming heaves. I shall have to go away and try to find the alleged "regularities" before I can refute them - the one that comes to mind immediately is that braces always delimit closures. (Except when they force a statement end by the newline rule.) However hard it may be to believe, I'm not just saying this to be snarky; I am excited by Perl 6 and want to see good things come out of it. I just want to make sure that the various creative processes are kept in check. :) -- Building translators is good clean fun. -- T. Cheatham