On 10/2/07, via RT Klaas-Jan Stol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > # New Ticket Created by Klaas-Jan Stol > # Please include the string: [perl #45935] > # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. > # <URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=45935 > > > > hi, > > a code snippet like this: > > the_value = new 'Type' > the_value = 42 > > is in my eyes not clear. It seems as if the first line creates an object, > and it seems to be discarded on the second line, as some value is assigned > to the_value. > > some time ago (months, maybe > 1 year?) there was a discussion about > different assignment operators for setting/assigning. I remember ":=" > being > mentioned. > I don't recall whether it was about the issue, or that it was about the > ops > "set" and "assign". > > I think this syntax could be improved, to make it more clear that the > value > 42 is assigned to the newly created object. > > kjs
as a note-to-self, maybe this is an idea: .local pmc a,b,c a = new 'Integer' set a = 42 So, instead of "a=42", you need to use the op. It reads kinda natural, "set a to 42", but it's a bit longer to type. likewise, this could be done for "assign" as well assign b = c Also, the aforementioned ":=" could be introduced, like so: a := new 'Integer' # assign a new object to a a = 42 # set some value to a a := b # assign value in b to a I'm not really sure if assigning another pmc and creating a new pmc can both be considered "assignment", thus using the ":=" assignment operator; in other words, would this be more consistent? Just some thoughts. kjs
