develooper Front page | perl.perl6.language | Postings from April 2005

<[]> ugly and hard to type

Thread Next
From:
Juerd
Date:
April 15, 2005 05:58
Subject:
<[]> ugly and hard to type
Message ID:
20050415125844.GI19716@c4.convolution.nl
Am I the only one who thinks <[a-z]> is ugly and hard to type because of
the nested brackets? The same goes for <{...}>. The latter can't easily
be fixed, I think, but the former perhaps can. If there are more who
think it needs to, that is. And <{}> is a bit easier to type because all
four are shifted (US QWERTY and US Dvorak), while with <[]> I really
have to think hard about when to press and when to release the shift
key.

\letter[] could well replace <[]>, and \LETTER[] would then replace
<-[]>. This is consistent with many other \letters.

"c" for character is taken
"r" for range is taken by carriage return
"a" for any is taken by alarm (bell)
"l" for list is taken by lcfirst

"m" is available, but I can't think of a mnemonic :)

\m[a..z]  \M[a..z]

And to replace <[a..z]-[aoeui]> (does that construct even exist?),
[ \m[a..z] & \M[aoeui] ]. IMO, that's the only step backwards.

"a" would best communicate its function. Is the beep thing used enough?
(\cG still does that thing if \a is gone.)


Juerd
-- 
http://convolution.nl/maak_juerd_blij.html
http://convolution.nl/make_juerd_happy.html 
http://convolution.nl/gajigu_juerd_n.html

Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About