Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from July 2013
On 4 July 2013 03:09, Aristotle Pagaltzis <pagaltzis@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> * Dave Mitchell <davem@iabyn.com> [2013-07-03 16:25]:
> > Alternatively, what about instead of expr->@*, we use
> >
> > expr->[]?
> >
> > This is currently a syntax error. It has the mnemonic of
> > a list slice that contains all elements. Ditto expr->{}.
>
> The same occurred to me just after reading Kent’s mail.
>
> > It's also currently a syntax error in quoted strings, so can easily be
> > used there too:
> >
> > print "$a->{}bar"
>
> Beautiful!
>
I like it more and more already. '->[ ]' says far more to me about
dereffing the invocant than ->@ does.
I was thinking that because of the implict bounding of this notation (
the [ ] parens ), you could probably get away with more "weird" syntax
within the [].
And you could possibly entertain the idea of a "*" component inside
it, or something, as a shorthand for a regex-like slicer.
ie:
->[] == ->[*] == ->[qr/.*/]
Which would be intuitive enough for the most part.
$arry->[*] = @list implies @{$array} = @list
$arry->[1] = @list implies ( $arry->[1], ) = @list
$arry->[1,2,3] = @list implies ( $arry->[1], $arry->[2],$arry->[3],) = @list
etc.
And same for hashes
->{} == ->{*} == ->{qr/.*/} == ->{ grep qr/.*/ keys %$invocant }
Though I don't like special casing too much, ... it could be seen we
could solve this dereferencing problem simply by extending the slice
operators to do our bidding.
--
Kent
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next