* TSa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-03-19 16:00]:
> Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote:
>> Something like
>>
>> path { $app_base_dir / $conf_dir / $foo_cfg . $cfg_ext }
>>
>> where the operators in that scope are overloaded irrespective of
>> the types of the variables (be they plain scalar strings,
>> inst
* Mark J. Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-03-19 20:45]:
> Maybe it's just 'cause I cut my teeth on BASIC, but + for
> string concatenation has always felt pretty natural. Obviously
> it won't work in Perl where you are using the operator to
> determine how to treat the operands. At first blush I fin
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 4:25 PM, Aristotle Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It makes the meaning of the statement dependent on
> the types of any variables, which is information that a reader
> won't necessarily find in close vicinity of the statement.
[...]
> if you're completely changi
* Mark J. Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-03-21 21:35]:
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 4:25 PM, Aristotle Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > It makes the meaning of the statement dependent on the types
> > of any variables, which is information that a reader won't
> > necessarily find in close v
