Front page | perl.perl6.language |
Postings from May 2007
Jonathan Lang wrote:
> Close. I'm thinking "added functionality for semicolon alternatives"
> rather than the "replace the semicolon" stunt that Semi::Semicolons
> pulls. In particular, as long as there's no ambiguity between
> prefix:<?> and postfix:<?>, I think that it would be quite useful for
> postfix:<?> to act as a semicolon that additionally sets $_ equal to
> the expression's value, allowing for a pseudo-Prolog style of syntax
> (i.e., the code could include questions as well as declarations and
> instructions).
A slightly tangental thought: is the behavior of C<given> with no block
defined? I.e. is
given $foo { when 1 {...} };
equivalent to
given $foo;
when 1 {...};
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next