Front page | perl.perl6.language |
Postings from June 2005
On 6/6/05, Sam Vilain <sam@vilain.net> wrote: > Roger Hale wrote: > > This is why I would rather the o -> [o] circumfixion left [o] an infix, > > not prefix operator. I would rather be explicit about my identity: > > $product = 1 [*] @array; > > Hmm. Not all operators *have* an identity. So, what's wrong with not providing an identity? It's not like we cannot have a module that says "[*] will be its own operator that defaults to 1, [+] will default to 0", and so forth. In fact, I can easily see a module like that being very useful. Remember - the language DOES NOT have to provide the sinecure for all situations. Discussions like this only emphasize that fact. Give it a module and let it go. In fact, if there's two different and competing implementations for the reduce meta-operator, then maybe it's better to provide a reduce-noident and reduce-ident and let people consciously choose which one they want to use ... RobThread Previous | Thread Next