Larry Wall wrote:
> On the other hand, -<> makes a pretty pathetic fish operator. So for
> the sake of argument, let's keep it =<> for the moment. But ignoring the
> tail leads us to the head end of the fish. What do we do about $ARGS?
> We could say this:
>
> =$fh : *$fh :: =<> : *<>
>
>
Author: autrijus
Date: Sun Apr 23 08:02:50 2006
New Revision: 8917
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
Log:
* S02: The *() form now means *($/).
* Clarified that $() etc are term-level macros.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
=
Author: autrijus
Date: Sun Apr 23 09:07:38 2006
New Revision: 8918
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S04.pod
Log:
* S04: the stop-parsing-on-bare-block rule for conditionals:
if -e { say "exists" } { extra() }
has also to stop parsing on pointies:
if -e -> $x { say "exists" } { extra()
Larry Wall skribis 2006-04-22 19:40 (-0700):
> Hmm, I almost never write "scalar " because I very rarely want to
> input a single line in list context. But leaving that aside...
I've used it a lot.
I do tend to use it less often as I move away from line based text
documents for storage.
> [101
> Given the recent explosion of svn commits in the synopses, and the fact that
> the versions of the synopses on the dev.perl.org/perl6 site are lagging a
> bit, would it make sense to add a link to the svn site to the
> Synopses page?
I'd rather not.
The ones on the dev site shouldn't have be
