Re: RFC 84 (v1) Replace => (stringifying comma) with =>

[Piers Cawley]

Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> >    > Are the two values of a pair restricted in anyway? All your examples
> >    > were scalar.
> > 
> > Yes. The two components must be scalars.
> > The key is stringified iff it's a bareword.
> > Otherwise no restrictions.
> 
> So assuming pairs are scalars...

[...]

> How about:
> 
>     (a => b => (c => d => e) => f => g)
> 
> Maybe we could have a pragma:
> 
>     use lisplike;
> 
> Which would make
> 
>     (a b (c d e) f g) == (a => b => (c => d => e) => f => g)
> 
> 
> Hmm... you know, once more I'm not sure if this is ugly or beautiful,
> but it's certainly fascinating. I think I like it.

Ooh, and we could use 'em for streams as well...

   $ints_from = ^1 => sub {$ints_from->(^1+1)};

   $ints = $ints_from->(1);

Now, if that hasn't sent the lisp haters running, screaming to the
hills, I wonder what will...

-- 
Piers