Firstly, thanks for writing the message out so clearly that it cannot be

Damian Conway skribis 2005-05-14 22:06 (+1000):
>         .{width}         //= 80;
>         .{height}        //= 24;
>         .{gutter}        //=  4;
>         .{justification} //= 'left';
>         .{available} = .{width} - .{gutter}
>         .{size} = .{width} * .{height};

Did something recently happen to .{} with regards to quoting, or did you
forget '' (or to use <>) here?

> Now, personally, I would like to see a short-cut for *both* types of
> method call, but if we can't have that (if only for the lack of
> spare punctuation) then I really think we have to go with the more
> general form.

^ would not clash. Yes, ^ has uses already, but none in this position:

    * &infix:<^^>, high prec xor
    * &infix:<+^>, &infix:<~^>, &infix:<?~>, bitwise xor
    * &prefix:<+^>, &prefix:<~^>(, &prefix:<?^>??), bitwise negation

It does mean you need whitespace for simple things like ^foo + ^bar,
which I think is a loss, especially because does work.
There's probably a reason why bare method() can't work, but I can't
think of one at this moment.

> the default chompee of a C<chomp>

chompee. Heh. That sounds funny :)


Reply via email to