chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Yet you have the choice of where to put your braces, even
>> though the braces don't lend themselves to different tasks
>> depending on whether you put them on a new line or not.
> You *don't* have the choice to use different types of
> braces, though -- at least not by default.
Right, but noone is asking for that. You also don't have
the choice of writing your code backwards, but noone is
asking for that either. The choice of using hyphens instead
of underscores is neither universally undesired nor absurd.
>> Is Perl 6 really in such a desperate need of new and more
>> powerful features that issues of convenience are irrelevant?
> I see the proposal to treat - and _ as identical in identifiers as a
> feature almost as useful as making identifiers case-insensitive.
It might not be as useful --- after all, it just lets you
raise those low-hanging bars in your names a few pixels ---
but I think it is less problematic. I do think that case
insensitivity is a desirable characteristic, but I am not
sure how feasible it would be in the case of Perl 6.
For example, it's good that BUILD and OUTER and all the
other uppercased special things are distinctly named.
If they were to be distinct under case insensitivity,
they would need some sigil or something.
> Heteronymity seems too dangerous to encourage by
> supporting as a default.
You may be right about this. I would be happy if the
standard distribution came with a package that enabled the
hyphenated identifiers syntax in the lexical block:
Hopefully the name of that package won't actually have
any underscores in it.
Daniel Brockman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>