David Mitchell wrote:
> Well, I was assuming that there would be *a* numeric class in scope
> - as defined be the innermost lexical 'use foo'.
And that numeric class would remove int and num from the scope?
> I assumed that Perl wouldn't be clever enough to know about all available
> numberic ty
At 02:34 PM 10/24/00 +0100, David Mitchell wrote:
>Ken Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > David Mitchell wrote:
> > > Now of course if we have the luxury of deciding that core perl 'knows'
> > > about complex numbers, then of the parser can be made to recognise ...
> >
> > The core doesn't need t
Ken Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Mitchell wrote:
> > Now of course if we have the luxury of deciding that core perl 'knows'
> > about complex numbers, then of the parser can be made to recognise ...
>
> The core doesn't need to know -- that was my point. All the core needs
> is the bas
David Mitchell wrote:
> Now of course if we have the luxury of deciding that core perl 'knows'
> about complex numbers, then of the parser can be made to recognise ...
The core doesn't need to know -- that was my point. All the core needs
is the basic constant folding rules _it_already_has_ comb
