Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yes, it's possible to have two routines with the same name which
> differ by signature... however, in Perl 6, C<for> has only one
> signature, and it's the one above. The C<for> loop you are thinking
> of is spelled C<loop>,
Oh, yes, forgot about that.
> To the contrary, C<while> and C<if> take only a single expression in
> scalar context, whereas C<for> takes a list in flattening list
> context.
*light dawns*
That's what I get for trying to start reading in the middle of a
thread, I guess.
> > Methinks that a signature should be able to call for a code block
> > in braces, and when it's called the signature after that code
> > block should be optional.
>
> You mean s:2nd/signature/semicolon/ ?
Yes, that was a thinko. I thought I typed semicolon there.
> This has already been discussed at length. The answer is "um". :-)
I see.
> So far documented, the semicolon is only optional when the closing
> brace is the only thing on the line. Don't worry, Larry's got a
> handle on this one, and I don't think it needs further discussion.
Cool.
> > Fooey, English is weird, let's stick with Perl.
>
> Hmm, that last quote seems a little odd when placed next to your
> signature... :-)
What, my little pathetic attempt at a JAPH? It's only even slightly
hard to follow if you don't understand closures. Nothing like some of
the clever monstrosities I've seen floating around on the net.
--
$;=sub{$/};@;=map{my($a,$b)=($_,$;);$;=sub{$a.$b->()}}
split//,"[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ --";$\=$ ;-> ();print$/
