I have to admit though that I somehow doubt that only one
applications(psh and perhaps the perldl shell, too) justifies such
additions to perl.
--
Markus Peter - SPiN GmbH
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
fect examples w/in a RFC proposing a way to declare
> a function to take it's arguments in infix instead of prefix manner.
Well - it only came to the list again as I retired the RFC as most
people
thought this was not important enough :-)
--
Markus Peter - SPiN GmbH
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
available at http://sourceforge.net/projects/psh/
--
Markus Peter - SPiN GmbH
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
is a false one, as those
> are not functions
I still say it looks familiar even if it's a false analogy. Another
possibility would be to use cmpi and eqi
--
Markus Peter - SPiN GmbH
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
this in the tab
completion code of the perl shell) to exotic to be fixed?
--
Markus Peter - SPiN GmbH
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
way to cope with a
distinction between die and throw but without the distinction we simply do
not have the problem. And I definitely do NOT want to have a dozen wrapper
modules or whatever till that usage withered away in CPAN in 95% of the
modules after 1 year.
--
Markus Peter - SPiN GmbH
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm not so sure what the advantage of that approach is except that you
could overload m and s (which could also be added to use overload)?
To me, this looks as if this probably has lots of potential for perl poetry
but not for programming...
--
Markus Peter - SPiN GmbH
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
uot;,"bla");
or
print "OK!" if $val eq "foo" or $val eq
except it's a lot more compact, intuitive to use and readable...
--
Markus Peter - SPiN GmbH
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
