> Currently,
>
> foo->bar($baz)
>
> can be parsed either as C<<'foo'->bar($baz)>>, or as C<<foo()->bar($baz)>>
> depending on how the symbol C<foo> was used on other places. The proposal
> is to always choose the first meaning: make C<< -> >> autoquote the bareword
> on the left.
Here is a question: How does this relate to getting hashrefs and
arrayrefs from functions?
if ( want->{count} > 2 ) { return $one, $two }
Will that be interpreted as:
'want'->{count}
want()->{count}
To be consistent, it should mean the first one. That is, the infix
operator -> should always autoquote the bareword to the left. Am I
correct in assuming that's what you meant?
-Nate
- RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not suffer from the a... Perl6 RFC Librarian
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not suffer f... Michael G Schwern
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not suffer f... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not suff... John Porter
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not suffer f... John Porter
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not suff... Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not suffer f... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not suff... Ilya Zakharevich
- Why -> cannot autoquote the LHS (was Re: RFC 2... Nathan Wiger
- Accessing perl's command line switches Chaim Frenkel
- Re: Why -> cannot autoquote the LHS (was R... Glenn Linderman
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not suffer f... Ilya Zakharevich
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not suff... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not ... Ilya Zakharevich
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should ... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls sh... Ilya Zakharevich
- Re: RFC 244 (v1) Method calls should not ... Tom Christiansen
