Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from September 2010
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 09:49, Dr.Ruud <rvtol+usenet@isolution.nl> wrote:
> I sent this before on 2010-08-25 20:58 +0200
> but didn't see it show up, so am sending it
> again.
>
> On 2010-08-25 16:18, David Golden wrote:
>
>> In casual conversation at conventions about "what still annoys you
>> about perl" -- and even in this thread -- many people cite their
>> annoyance with writing @{ ... } or %{ ... } over and over again.
>
> You could see that as a precedence issue.
>
> Writing
>
> @$foo->{ bar }
>
> when you meant
>
> @{ $foo->{ bar } }
>
> makes you long for a low precedence variant of the @.
>
> It could maybe look like
>
> @:$foo->{ bar }
>
> --
> Ruud
>
Twigil derefrencing? Why not? It should have a higher precedence
than ++ and -- but a lower precedence than ->. Hmmm, but : is used
for package name separation and accessing the package hash; the
difference between %: and %:: isn't large enough. We should also
avoid any of the twigils being used by Perl 6 to avoid confusion
there; so that rules out . ! ^ : * ? = < and ~. It can't be $, @, %,
&, or #. It also shouldn't be , or ;. That leaves _, -, and +.
How do these look?
print @{$ref->{a}{b}}, "\n"
print @_$ref->{a}{b}, "\n";
print @-$ref->{a}{b}, "\n";
print @+$ref->{a}{b}, "\n";
I am leaning toward - because you don't have to hit shift to get it.
It is also similar to, but distinct from ->.
--
Chas. Owens
wonkden.net
The most important skill a programmer can have is the ability to read.
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next