Peter Haworth skribis 2004-04-20 14:56 (+0100): > > I think %hash<<key key key>> is best explained as %hash{ << key key > > key >> } with implicit curlies, not as an alternative to curlies. > In that case, why aren't you suggesting something more in line with that? > Here's what I'd like to see instead of your suggestion: > %hash<<key key key>> === %hash{<<key key key>>} > %hash'key' === %hash{'key'} > %hash"key" === %hash{"key"} > That has > * as few keystrokes as perl5's $hash{key} > * delimiters at both ends, so you can even use non-bareword constants > * existing syntax reused in the same way as the <<>> variant > * interpolation allowed in the double quoted variant.
Hm, not bad. Doesn't do anything to arrays yet, but I like the idea. We could maybe even treat hashes and arrays as list operators. That would allow whitespace, and also: @array 15 But I liked about the backtick that it's special syntax, which makes it recognisable. Still, your idea is doable. Juerd