As we now know, in many situations, << and � mean the same thing. In
exactly those situations, the same is true for >> and �. However,
sometimes, � cannot be used where << can. Here-docs are an example.

�� (or <<>>, if you wish) quotes. I am assuming that �� is a shorthand
for qw��, except where special syntax is used with hash slices and
:-pairs, just like //, which is short for m//, "" for qq"", etcetera.

But as � foo bar � and << foo bar >> are the same thing, I wonder what
qw<< foo bar >> means. Is that qw/< foo bar >/ or is that qw/foo bar/?
And is this consistent with other operators, i.e. rx�� versus rx<<>>?

Another question comes to mind as I am typing this message. Can � and >>
be used together, or does � always need � and << need >>? If a matching
pair is required, then does the same hold true for vector ops with anqle
quotes on both sides (i.e. is that seen as a "quoted" operator, or as an
operator that happens to have two vectorizing symbols)?

One last question for now: how hard will it be to implement a grammar
with certain not otherwise specified language features *removed*?


Juerd

Reply via email to