Uri Guttman wrote:
DC> Sure. Just as $42 is a shorthand for $/[42], so too $<whatever> is a DC> shorthand for $/<whatever>.
but then what about the different index bases for $42 and $/[42]? i
don't think that has been resolved (nor has mixing the $1.1 and $1[1]
syntaxes).
Bear in mind that that reply was posted in haste, late at night, after a long day of teaching. We're lucky it as only off by one! %-)
But it does raise an important point: the discrepancy between $42 and $/[41] *is* a great opportunity for off-by-on errors. Previously, however, @Larry have tossed back and forth the possibility of using $0 as the first capture variable so that the indices of $/[0], $/[1], $/[2] match up with the "names" of $0, $1, $2, etc.
I think this error--unintentional, I swear!--argues strongly that internal consistency within Perl 6 is more important than historical consistency with Perl 5's $1, $2, $3...
But that's only the opinion of one(@Larry), not of $Larry.
Damian
