On 7/11/05, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 11:14:18AM +0200, Michele Dondi wrote:
> : Hmmm... I am one of those who likes ./ more, instead. I mean, I _really_
> : like it! Thus, how about making '/' less meaningless, i.e. more
> : meaningful, in more general situations?!?
> Um, do you have a specific proposal?  Like maybe / can be applied as a
> metaoperator to any binary operator to make it into a unary operator
> with the left side implicitly $?SELF, or some such?  Hmm...
>     if ==/ 3    # if $?SELF == 3
> could even extend it to postfix ops:
>     ++/;        # $?SELF++
> However, it has several problems.  First, "." isn't really a binary
> operator, but the prefix of a postfix operator.  Second, the / is
> potentially ambiguous with a following pattern unless we require
> space before termish /.  Third, the / is psychologically in the wrong
> place to stand in for something in front.  Or to turn these on their
> head, we've just made three good arguments for something like:
>     if o == 3
> and
>     o++;
> I'm afraid that, while ./ is cute and visually distinctive, I find
> I'm getting tired of its idiosyncracies.  You shouldn't go out and
> marry someone just because they're cute and visually distinctive.
> Hooray for long engagements, and occasional disengagements.

Yay!  I guess I will take this moment to resuggest @^ as a list of
invocants and $^ =:= @^[0].  I like how the ^ kinda points you the
right way, also visually distinctive and doesn't get in the way of

"Computer Science is merely the post-Turing Decline of Formal Systems Theory."
-Stan Kelly-Bootle, The Devil's DP Dictionary

Reply via email to