On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 10:05:55PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
: On 11/17/05, Joshua Choi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > But what does that mean for =>'s signature? What type would be its
: > first parameter? Would you call it "&infix:{'=>'}:(Bareword | Any,
: > Any)" or something like that? And in any case, would you be able to
: > use this autoquoting in or as a sub, operator, type, etc.?
: I think => gets special treatment from the parser; i.e. it is
: undeclarable.  It's probably not even declarable as a macro, since it
: needs to look behind itself for what to quote.

Yes, it's basically a lookahead on the rule that parses a bare identifier,
that is, one that is not "forced" by something to its left like $ or "sub".

: And I think this is okay.  For some reason, we are not satisfied if
: "if" is undeclarable, but => being so is fine.  I can't put my finger
: on why I feel this way, though.

How do you declare '.' in Lisp?  :-)


Reply via email to