From: "Jonathan Scott Duff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Nathan Wiger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 4:08 PM
Subject: Re: YA string concat proposal
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 01:05:24PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> > Under the above plan, maybe this is:
> > $a ca $b;
> > For "concat after"?
> I'd rather it be called "pp" for prepend. :-)
I'd rather it be spelled $a =. $b; (or $a=.$b, or $a=."/index.html"; I
don't see how any of those are subject to misparse. $a=.5 would be, of
couse, but you can disambugate by $a=. 5 or C<$a=."5">.
> It's good that we decided to let Larry design the language, otherwise
> we'd be mired in muck like this for a long time.
Yah. And it looks like we're going to be as it is. It's been said
elsewhere on these threads: What does changing to "." from -> buy us?
I can see that "." is shorter to type then ->, but, say, \ would be just as
good. I can't really say changing because "." is more standard. It isn't
standard to C or perl5. It's possible to misparse "." as concat with "." as
a sepperator on version-strings, but that's more of a problem with using it
for method-call.
-=- James Mastros
