Simon Cozens wrote: > John Porter wrote: > > $a = $b $c; > > Actually, I'd rather like that to be equivalent to > $a = $c->$b; Oops, sorry, I forgot the smiley. Oh, but thinking seriously about it: do we really want to keep the "indirect object" syntax? It is said to be a major source of ambiguity in perl. -- John Porter
- Re: Tying & Overloading Simon Cozens
- Re: Tying & Overloading Simon Cozens
- Re: Tying & Overloading H . Merijn Brand
- Re: Tying & Overloading Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: Tying & Overloading Graham Barr
- Re: Tying & Overloading H . Merijn Brand
- Re: Tying & Overloading Graham Barr
- Re: Tying & Overloading Davíð Helgason
- Re: Tying & Overloading John Porter
- Re: Tying & Overloading Simon Cozens
- Re: Tying & Overloading John Porter
- Re: Tying & Overloading Dan Sugalski
- Re: Tying & Overloading Dan Sugalski
- Re: Tying & Overloading Simon Cozens
- Re: Tying & Overloading Graham Barr
- Re: Tying & Overloading Larry Wall
- Re: Tying & Overloading Stephen P. Potter
- Re: Tying & Overloading Dan Sugalski
- Re: Tying & Overloading David L. Nicol
- Re: Tying & Overloading Stephen P. Potter
- Re: Tying & Overloading Nathan Wiger