Simon Cozens wrote:
> semantic ambiguity in there if you look hard enough, but
> can't come up with any example off hand.

I think I don't like the proposition that "it"
refer to the most recent *lexically* referenced scalar.
For example, in

  $x ? $y : $z;

I think "it" should refer to whichever of $y or $z
was evaluated, not always simply $z.

How is this done with C<_> currently?

-- 
John Porter

Reply via email to