Consider the following.
sub foo {...}
foo *@ary;
foo * @ary;
Is this another place where whitespace will have meaning? Or should I
add parentheses to disambiguate? Enquiring minds want to know.
--
Piers
"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a language in
possession of
Piers Cawley writes:
: Consider the following.
:
:sub foo {...}
:
:foo *@ary;
:foo * @ary;
:
: Is this another place where whitespace will have meaning? Or should I
: add parentheses to disambiguate? Enquiring minds want to know.
I see no ambiguity. It's a unary * in either case.
Damian Conway wrote:
> BUGS
> Unlikely, since it doesn't actually do anything. However,
> bug reports and other feedback are most welcome.
Bug:
don't { die } unless .error;
doesn't DWIM (though the current behavour, "do nothing", is
logically correct).
Dave.
From: "David Whipp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> don't { die } unless .error;
Whoa. This don't thing is starting to look eerily useful. Shades of the
Parrot parody.
-Miko
On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 11:13:45AM -0700, David Whipp wrote:
> Damian Conway wrote:
> > BUGS
> > Unlikely, since it doesn't actually do anything. However,
> > bug reports and other feedback are most welcome.
>
> Bug:
>
> don't { die } unless .error;
>
> doesn't DWIM (though the curre
> It's also unnecessary. The Holy Scoping Rules actually work in your favour in
> this case. In Perl 6 you can just do this:
>
>
> while my $cond = blah() {
> ...
> }
>
> and C<$cond> is defined *outside* the block.
Question then. Does the following code compile?
while
Allison Randal wrote:
> You know, I almost made a very similar reply. But I read through
> Damian's message a second time and changed my mind. C makes
> sense as a C minus C. As a C minus C it's less
> appealing. At the very least it begs a different name than "BETWEEN" (a
> name that implies it
