On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 11:59:35AM -0700, Dave Whipp wrote:
: Jonathan Lang wrote:
:
: >Close. I'm thinking "added functionality for semicolon alternatives"
: >rather than the "replace the semicolon" stunt that Semi::Semicolons
: >pulls. In particular, as long as there's no ambiguity between
: >prefix:<?> and postfix:<?>, I think that it would be quite useful for
: >postfix:<?> to act as a semicolon that additionally sets $_ equal to
: >the expression's value, allowing for a pseudo-Prolog style of syntax
: >(i.e., the code could include questions as well as declarations and
: >instructions).
:
: A slightly tangental thought: is the behavior of C<given> with no block
: defined? I.e. is
It would be illegal syntax currently.
: given $foo { when 1 {...} };
:
: equivalent to
:
: given $foo;
: when 1 {...};
Both of these suggestions would seem to duplicate the existing construct:
$_ = $foo;
:-)
Of course, now someone will argue that unary:<=> should assign to $_ by
default, in which case we'd have to find a new interation operator...
Larry
