On 2009-Aug-18, at 7:05 am, Mark J. Reed wrote:
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 6:59 AM, Carlin Bingham<car...@theintersect.org > wrote:
2009/8/18 Timothy S. Nelson <wayl...@wayland.id.au>:
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009, Mark J. Reed wrote:

It's not in the revised spec, but I think that, even though we've revived chdir, we should still have it so that changing $*CWD will do a
chdir under the hood.

You're quoting the wrong person.  That wasn't me.

Technically of course, he quoted Tim quoting you without any of the double-quoted material but with the quoted attribution referring to your non-quoted quote. I wish e-mail programs were smart enough to catch when somebody's text has all been snipped out but the dangling attribution hasn't.

Hey, what if P6 had built-in mail software that used a Grammar to analyse messages and store the nested levels in a Tree structure -- we could have a special A: quoting mechanism for literal attributions, and maybe some variations like aa: to allow for interpolated names, or a:dates to parse "YYYY-MM-DD", etc. as automatically inserted date formats. "On" could be a special macro so you don't even need quotes around an attribution line. Oh, and people use different languages to say "On $date, $foo wrote", but that's pretty easy to fix: just include a working version of babelfish.com (it's just a few textareas -- you could probably whip it up in a day using Catalyst).

Plus it should disallow / \ ? * $ @ % ☹ unless preceded by (##`=☞, and not run any executable code when you're looking at it. And there's a magic plural-\s (s/:/>/g), but it works only if the attributee is Larry Wall.

-David "is it bedtime yet?" Green

Reply via email to