At 05:43 PM 1/26/02 +0000, Simon Cozens wrote:
>On Sat, Jan 26, 2002 at 09:28:18AM -0800, Peter Scott wrote:
> > > %foo{"bar"}
>
>It's bare, and it's a word.
Maybe you want to come up with another term to describe it then... but it
isn't a "bareword" in Perl. Camel III p.64 footnote: "... It's only a
bareword when the parser has no clue." p.65: "If you say C<use strict
'subs';> then any bareword will produce a compile-time error."
>I presume you're also happy with these ambiguities:
> $foo{shift} vs. $foo{"shift"}
I'm not arguing with the ambiguities you pointed out (which have vexed me
on occasion also); just that it ain't a bareword. "Unquoted identifier used
as hash subscript" is a bit of a mouthful, though.
Maybe there will be a Perl 6 rule forcing the keys to be quoted, but it
won't be because of the "no barewords" rule. If there were such a rule, I
presume you'd also apply it to the LHS of =>?
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
http://www.perldebugged.com
