On Fri, Nov 26, 2004 at 02:10:06PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: I might be happy to remove them, though people will write q:x instead
: of qq:x and wonder why it doesn't interpolate. What I think is fun is
: qq:x:w, which presumably runs the command and then splits the result
: into words.
:
: I know everone has their reflexes tuned to type qw currently, but
: how many of you Gentle Readers would feel blighted if we turned it
: into q:w instead?
Of course, if we wanted to really drive it into the ground, we could
turn qq// into q:q//, and then there's only one quoter. I'm sure if we
tried hard enough we could find someone this appeals to.
We also haven't quite detangled the backslash options. Seems there are
four levels of support (using \/ to stand for any terminator character):
0) none # <<'' default
1) \\ and \/ # q// default
2) list # (nothing builtin)
3) all # qq// default
We need some way of specifying level 0 for a non-heredoc. We could turn
q// into that, I suppose. If we did, either we'd have to make '' the
same, or let it differ from q//, neither of which quite appeals to me,
but I might let myself be argued into one of them or the other.
I figure :b can mean level 3, and for level 2 :b«nt» could mean
just \n and \t. I suppose :b(0) and :b(1) could mean levels 0 and
1, but that's just plain sucky. Could force 0 and 1 with :b«» and
:b«\\\/» respectively, but that's a bit long-winded. Could use two
different adverbs, or a qh// that defaults to level 0, but those are
also rather yucky. I'm open to other ideas, though we must remind
ourselves that this is all very bike-sheddish.
Larry
