On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 12:26:34AM -0800, Mark Lentczner wrote: > I've got three small operator questions before the new table of the > operators is done: > > > 1) Is C<mod> no longer an operator? It is still listed in S03, but > STD.pm doesn't parse it.
Have it in my STD now. :) > 2) Is C<\> no longer an operator? S03 lists it as a symbolic unary, but > STD.pm doesn't parse it that way. It's not really an operator any more. S03 will clarify when I check it in. > 3) Should C<&> be considered a contextualizer list prefix operator like > the other sigils? S03 doesn't list this one, but STD.pm will parse it > that way. I suspect it is not listed because unlike the others, it makes > no sense to contextualize a list of values as a routine. Hmm, maybe someone can think up a use for it. Don't see any reason to disallow it, and it can always be used to document that a scalar must contain a code object of some sort. Larry
