I think there are a couple answers. The simple one is yes -- embrace the
whitespace. Maybe wrap them in ()', like (2 d 6).
Another line of ideas is wrapping things with some other operators. Maybe a
special quoting operator or a converter.
[[2d6]] # double for dice!
"2d6":dice # postfix. This used to work but maybe doesn't now
dice[ 2d6 ] # circumfix
And then the third thing that comes to mind is adding a slang, though that
is, I believe, the least stable language-level approach. Dunno.
--Brock
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 7:16 AM, Simon Proctor <simon.proc...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> So I had a crazy little idea. I've played the odd bit of roleplaying in my
> time and wanted to created a 'd' operator.
>
> Quite simple really.
>
> sub infix:<d> ( Int $num, Int $size ) { [+] (1..$size).roll($num) };
>
> sub prefix:<d> ( Int $size ) { 1 d $size }
>
> Gives us 3 d 6 to roll 3 six sided dice or a prefix d 10 for a single 10
> sided dice.
>
> Except... I'd really like to write 3d6 or d10 but the parser barfs.
>
> Am I going to just have to live with that? Or did I miss something
> obvious?
>
> Obviously it's possible to have operators that ignore whitespace (1+1
> works just fine) but is it possibly for user defined ones?
>
> Possibly more serious ones.
>
> Simon
>
