Re: RFC 168 (v1) Built-in functions should be functions

[Damian Conway]

   > I think it would be a good thing for user prototypes to be able to
   > handle this case and I wholeheartedly support the RFC; but it opens
   > a can of worms that should be addressed. Perhaps in another RFC. Do
   > any other (Damian) RFCs on (Damian) prototyping impact (Damian)
   > this area?

I'll need to think about that issue. Can anyone think of an optional left
argument that *isn't* really an indirect object?

Damian