On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 09:21:40AM -0700, Dave Whipp wrote:
> Luke Palmer wrote:
> >Joked? Every other language that has pattern matching signatures that
> >I know of (that is, ML family and Prolog) uses _. Why should we break
> >that? IMO, it's immediately obvious what it means.
> >Something tells me that in signature unification, "undef" means "this
> >has to be undef", much like "1" means "this has to be 1".
> In Perl6 we currently have at least tw oways to say "don't care": In a
> regex, we say /./ to match anything; in a type signature, we use "Any"
> to mean that we don't care what the type is. I don't think we need
> another way to say "don't care". In fact, we could unify things:
> rules: /<Any>/ matches anything (/./ is shorthand synonym)
Is that strictly correct? /./ doesn't match an empty string.
Or did I miss some context earlier in the thread?