|Oh! I have an idea! Why don't we make the lexer just realize a prefix
|"els" on any operator. Then you could do C<if .. {} elsexit>. :P
|
|My point is that, IMO, this whole "els" thing is completely preposterous.
|I'm the kind of person that likes to keep down on keywords. And I never
|liked Perl5's C<elsif> anyway; I always preferred C<else if>. I really
|don't understand what at all is appealing about C<elsloop>.
]- yeah i think we better stay away from all those elsxxx nightmare ... and don't go
to the trap of those or similar abbreviation ...
Better have else xxx (whatever this xxx is)..
i think we should do abbreviatoins only on something we use very often..
|Here's my synopsis of how everything's gone so far:
|
|We have the following syntaxes for elses on loops (for any kind, not just
|loop).
| loop ;; {} else {}
| loop ;; { else {} }
| loop ;; { ELSE {} }
|Or replace any of these with C<otherwise>.
|
|Furthermore, we have a couple of different ways for loops to come after
|elses:
| elsloop ;; {}
]- pls nooo...
| else loop ;; {}
| else { loop ;; {} }
|
|I don't think C<otherwisloop> has been proposed :).
]- better no :")
|If anyone has other ideas, or an insanely good reason why one of these is
|optimal, we're all ears. I think we all trust Larry to make the right
|decision, but he might not be God. New ideas are good.
]- This whole thread lead us to think we need one compound word/s-construction that
]handle condtions & loops in a common way... which is a good thing i think :")
i.e. loops and conditions to become a special cases of this..
======
iVAN
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
PS. I can't remember was this discused but will we have pre-post handlers to sub's ...
will we have this ability for {blocks}.... and then is the loop some sort of block,
so that we can attach these too :")
