Front page | perl.perl6.language |
Postings from April 2002
Re: Unary dot
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next
From:
Mark J. Reed
Date:
April 10, 2002 12:49
Subject:
Re: Unary dot
Message ID:
20020410194944.GR18047@charm.turner.com
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 02:42:58PM -0500, Allison Randal wrote:
> > I like the following, assumed to be within method m1:
> >
> > ..m2(); # call m2 the same way m1 was called, instance or class
>
> This has already been semi-rejected. I agree with the reasoning. Not
> that it wouldn't be nice to have a way to code the concept, just that
> the ".." symbology isn't right for the job.
MUA/MTA quoting seems to be getting in the way here - someone's prepending a
'.' to avoid sending the SMTP end-of-message sentinel and it's not getting
stripped off properly. That was supposed to be a single '.' in front of
the m2(). In other words, unary . is the same as binary . with $_ as
the LHS, so .m2() would be the same as $_.m2(). Which would have the
semantics in my comment above, assuming that the class becomes the topic
in static methods.
--
Mark J. REED <markjreed@mail.com>
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next