On Tue, 25 Oct 2005, Juerd wrote:
Michele Dondi skribis 2005-10-25 17:05 (+0200):Now, one that I've sometimes desired is a "two level" $_, i.e. a variable, say, $__ referring to the _second next_ enclosing lexical scope. I am aware that in this vein one may ask a third analogue and so on, but let's face it: $_ already covers 95% of cases, my hypothetical var would cover I guess a remaining 4.5% of cases, and who cares for the rest? E.g.: for @vert { put_point $_, $__ for @horiz; }I find $__ confusing, and prefer $OUTER::_, which already exists.
Hmmm... maybe you're right that $__ is too huffmanized (and hence confusing) but $OUTER::_ is somewhat too few...
Michele --
A question out of curiousity: who is this Green of Green's functions? Is he the same person of Green's theorem? :)
Yes. He was also an early environmentalist; hence the current phrases "green" this and "green" that... - David C. Ullrich in sci.math, "Re: Who is Green?"
