Re: RFC 238 (v1) length(@ary) deserves a warning

[Damian Conway]

   > > What exactly didn't you like about RFC 128???
   > 
   > Ummm... the fact that its title doesn't match /proto/.  My bad.

In fact it proposes that "prototype" be banished as a term of reference. :-)
   
   > Okay, its a proposal to overhaul prototyping, cool.  But I don't see
   > anything to allow C<length $string> and C<length @array> live
   > together.  Its a big RFC, I probably missed it.

Look up "context classes". C<length> would be:

        sub length ( [$\@] ) {...}

Damian