develooper Front page | perl.bootstrap | Postings from July 2000

Re: y/rple/yma/ (was: LALR (was Re: Working Group Proposal))

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Randy J. Ray
Date:
July 24, 2000 18:21
Subject:
Re: y/rple/yma/ (was: LALR (was Re: Working Group Proposal))
Message ID:
200007250103.SAA28174@tzimisce.soma.redhat.com
  >>> $foo.method();
  >>> 
  >>> same as
  >>> 
  >>> $foo->method();

  Tom> It's a perennial *Active*State* request.  They want it so they can
  Tom> simplify their documentation for *Micro*Soft* interfaces, since
  Tom> "everybody else" uses dots.

Is it just me, or are these two not supposed to be the same in the C++
world anyway? Just as these are distinct in C++:

      foo.method()

      foo->method()

Technically, were Perl to adopt such a syntax, I would expect it to look
more like:

      $$foo.method()

      $foo->method()

unless the proposed syntax includes blessing non-reference scalars as
objects. And that, I would argue against almost to the point of fanaticism.
I can't imagine the above syntax would make the AS Perl any more
MS-friendly in the least bit.

Randy
--
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Randy J. Ray            | "NSA doesn't need a key to compromise security in
rjray@redhat.com        | Windows. Programs like Back Orifice can do it without
415-777-9810 x246       | any keys." --Bruce Schneier on the MS/NSA controversy

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