On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 08:51:24AM -0600, Eric wrote:
: Just my two cents, but whenever i see "when True {...}" I expect $_
: to be true, so that i can do when True and when False. And I if see
: when followed by a comparison i expect the when to be true when the
: comparison is true. To me its kind of like, if you only have one
: operand then use the given subject, if you have two operands then they
: don't need a subject. So the given $_ topic would fill in only in the
: cases where you needed a topic. Of course that might not realy make
: since for given/when and its smart matching magic. But then maybe we
: just don't want to be able to say "when $a == $b" and thats just
: invalid since it would be clearer written as an if.
After much mulling, I've I've left booleans in a priviledged state of
assuming {...} around themselves. (Wrapping in {...} is the generic
method of suppressing comparison to $_, though ? and true() also work
for that.) You can always write
given $boolean {
when .true {...}
when .not {...}
}
to mean the other thing. Or horrors, maybe even just use an "if"...
Larry
