Damian Conway wrote:
>I'm not enamoured of the .# I must confess. Nor of the #. either. I wonder
>whether we need the dot at all. Or, indeed, the full power of arbitrary
>delimiters after the octothorpe.
>
>
Agreed.
>What if we restricted the delimiters to the five types of balanced brackets?
>And then simply said that, when any comment specifier (i.e. any octothorpe) is
>followed immediately by an opening bracket, the comment extends to the
>corresponding closing bracket?
>
>Then you could have:
>
> #[ This is a comment ]
> #( This is a comment )
> #{ This is a comment }
> #< This is a comment >
> #« This is a comment »
>
>
This does mean that if you comment out blocks with s/^/#/, you mess up on:
#sub foo
#{
# if foo { }
#}
>That would also mean that # is *always* the comment introducer
>(and the *only* comment introducer).
>
>
I agree with this goal.
I propose this form: #* *#
As a leading * on a line is unusual, and it also has visual similarity
to multi-line comments in C.
>As for gappy dotting, that would become:
>
> $x#[ ].foo()
> or:
>
> $x.#< >foo()
>
>
For comparison:
$x#* *#.foo()
or:
$x.#* *#foo()
