Front page | perl.perl6.language |
Postings from May 2001
Damian Conway wrote: > > Simon observed: > > > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 03:30:07PM -0700, Dave Storrs wrote: > > > - A while ago, someone suggested that the word 'has' be an alias > > > for 'is', so that when you roll your own properties, you could write > > > more-grammatically-correct statements such as "my $var has > > > Colors(3)". Since 'are' is being considered as a synonym, is there a > > > possibility that 'has' will make it too? > > > > It would be disappointing if a substantial proportion of the built-in > > keywords were merely syntactic sugar for each other. is|are|has|: seem > > like far too many ways to express exactly the same concept. > > I agree. However, we envisage that the Perl 6 parser itself will be > highly mutable and comparatively painless to mutate, so it should be > easy to set up modules that create as many synonyms as you feel are > needed/necessary/required/essential/requisite/demanded/called for. Here's a thought: warn "half-(digested|baked) ideas ahead"; @a is constant; #sets @a to constant @a has constant; #same thing @a are constant; #sets *each element* of @a to constant @a have constant; #same thing See the distinction? This doesn't show well in the case of constant, but consider a property that says "remember my old value whenever I'm assigned to." We'll call this 'undoable'. In this case: @a is undoable; #@a=() is noticed, @a[0] isn't @a are undoable; #@a[0] is noticed, @a=() isn't (or maybe it is?) #i could have used has/have instead, but is/are makes more sense here --Brent Dax brentdax1@earthlink.netThread Previous | Thread Next