develooper Front page | perl.perl6.language | Postings from May 2001

Re: what I meant about hungarian notation

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Me
Date:
May 10, 2001 14:55
Subject:
Re: what I meant about hungarian notation
Message ID:
03f201c0d99a$f3029e80$6501a8c0@me
> : Assuming that optimization opportunities remained intact,
> 
> They won't, but go on.

Because the syntax won't provide the compiler enough info?


> : do you think conflating @ and % would be a perl6 design win?
> 
> Nope, I still think most ordinary people want different
> operators for strings than for numbers.

Yes.

But...

I think it's rather more natural to view an array or hash
element as a special form of function call than it is to
view parens as operators.

    foo(1,2)

is a function call with two numeric arguments. What
syntax should one use to call a function with two string
arguments?

I am very happy that one does not have to use
differing parens (and presumably commas)
according to signature!

The danger here is stretching analogies too far...

> Dictionaries and calculators have very different
> interfaces in the real world, and it's false economy
> to overgeneralize.

From numbers versus strings as subscripts to this
makes for an exquisitely ironic statement.

I have lived in awe and admiration of Larry for years
(and still do, I mean, A1/A2 are just incredible imo),
but at last I know he's almost human!


Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About