Dave Thorn wrote:
> anyone got a link to the article explaining why we won't get
> the hook-hook operator?
*The* article? I don't know whether there's any particular article saying
why we won't get it. See perl5-porters _passim_ for discussion.
A discussion list, perl-defop IIRC, was set up but discussion died down
after a while so it was not considered worth implementing.
I seem to recall Tom Christiansen was rather vigorously against the idea,
but I can't recall the arguments he presented. It was rather a while ago.
I also know that someone posted a patch to the list that he had applied to
his local perl which provided hook-hook as '|||' (IIRC). But I don't
remember who it was or when-abouts that happened, so I wouldn't know where
to start looking in the archives.
Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
