On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Luke Palmer wrote:
> From: Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> is a fatal error. I could argue for this to change, as to support
> better readability (and it would). It's obvious WIM, so why doesn't it
> DWIM (disclaimer: cannot be used as an argument for arbitrary features.
Murat Ünalan wrote:
Oh yes. Psycho-affectivly it is disturbing seeing the group of variables
($pre, $in, $post) teared apart from the initilizing (0..2). This is my
second step in the brain when analysing it. And this is prone to
problems like in:
my int ($one, $two, $three, $four, $five, $six,
Luke Palmer wrote:
> In Perl 5,
>
> my int ($one = 0, $two = 1, $three = 2);
>
> is a fatal error. I could argue for this to change, as to support
> better readability (and it would). It's obvious WIM, so why doesn't
> it DWIM (disclaimer: cannot be used as an argument for arbitrary
> featu
> From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Murat_=DCnalan?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 14:50:22 +0100
>
> > > my int ($pre, $in, $post) is constant = (0..2);
> > >
> > > Two things "type and property" that belong so together
> >
> > Do they? Surely the type and constancy of a variable are
> > ent
