Luke Palmer skribis 2005-05-06 10:43 (-0600):
> Thanks!  Here's an annotated bit for each ?.

Only the triple-questionmarks were meant as questions. I should have
picked a better meta-operator for AVAILABLE?. But apparently, even
though I didn't mean to ask so many questions, there still are answers I
hadn't thought about.

Thanks for your detailed reply!

> >     !        not               none() ???
> Nope.  In order to create those, you just need to say none().  There
> is no operator form.

Do we have postfix ! for factorials, or is it available?

> >     $$       AVAILABLE?        AVAILABLE
> Nope.  Not in term position.  I hardly think it would be a good idea
> to make an operator out of it (or even a single $), however.

Why would a single $ be a bad operator? We already have the single % for
mod, and that works well. I think @ and $ are perfect candidates for
infix operators.

> I suppose it is.  That would destroy Damian's favorite little idiom:
>     while ($x --> 0) {...}

aww :)

> That's "class sigil" in term position.  Separating namespaces never
> have preceding whitespace, so they're always part of some larger term.

Is there any important difference between "namespace" and "class" in
Perl 6? Do they share the same, ehm, namespace? (classspace?)

Thanks again.


Reply via email to