develooper Front page | perl.perl6.language | Postings from April 2006

Re: or long dot and the range operator

Thread Previous | Thread Next
April 12, 2006 00:07
Re: or long dot and the range operator
Message ID:

Larry Wall wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 12:41:30PM +0200, TSa wrote:
> : I'm unsure what the outcome of the recent long dot discussions is
> : as far as the range operator is concerned.
> .. is always the range operator.  The "dot wedge" just has a discontinuity
> in it there.  I can't think of any wedgey applications that wouldn't work
> about as well by starting the wedge with $x. .y instead of $x.y.

Doesn't that discontinuity devalue the long dot? Its purpose is 
alignment in the first palce. For a one char diff in length one
now needs

    foo.  .bar;
    self. .bar;

instead of

    foo .bar;;

with the rules as before long dot was invented. Why are calls
on the topic so important? Wouldn't it be cleaner to force
a leading zero in numeric literals?

I might be to blind to see it, but could someone give some
examples where the cleanliness of the new parsing is obvious?
I mean compared to the old rules, not counting intended calls
on topic.

Thread Previous | Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About