Re: Set sigils (was: Re: Junction Values)
On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 01:43:57PM -0800, Ashley Winters wrote:
Instead of primary sigils, what about secondary sigils on an array to
mark it as an unordered set?
@|foo = any
@foo = all
@^foo = one # can arrays be curried arguments? hmm
@!foo = none
After all, why should scalars get all the good secondary sigils? :)
Just noting that secondary sigils aren't limited to scalars:
@*biglist = 1... ; # global @::*::biglist
has %.dictionary; # public attribute
has @:children;# private attribute
say @?BLOCK; # which blocks am I in?
{ sort @^list; } # placeholder array
%=POD{'DATA'} # filehandle for =begin DATA stream
Pm
Set sigils (was: Re: Junction Values)
On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 15:20:59 -0600, Rod Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Positions I still stand by: - Sets belong in the language, and need more support. This can likely be done at the module level, but I'd like them better incorporated, preferably with their own sigil. However, I believe they can peacefully coexist with Junctions, and one concept does not need to crowd out the other. Instead of primary sigils, what about secondary sigils on an array to mark it as an unordered set? @|foo = any @foo = all @^foo = one # can arrays be curried arguments? hmm @!foo = none After all, why should scalars get all the good secondary sigils? :) Ashley Winters
