Edwin Steiner:
# Is this going to concat $a,$b and $c?
#
# $foo = _($a,$b,$c);
#
# (One way to save underlines and spaces.)
# Or would that be:
#
# $foo = _@($a,$b,$c);
That would be C$foo=join('', $a, $b, $c), just like in Perl 5.
# BTW: what will these do?
#
# $a _=_ ($b,$c);
That's concatenating a stringified list ($b, $c) to $a. (Unary _ is the
stringification operator.)
# $a ^_= ($b,$c); # (better with hypo-operator?, see below)
#
# (WIM in Perl 5: $a .= $b.$c ?)
No, that'll be the same as C$a _= $c, since $a creates a scalar
context.
# Could there also be *hypo*-operators, i.e. operators which try to
# *lower* (reduce) the dimensionality of their operands to the lowest
# common dim. So
#
# $foo = 5 +^ (1,2);
#
# would set $foo to (5 + 1) + 2 and
#
# $foo = $a _^ ($b,$c);
# $a _=^ ($b,$c);
#
# would do the same concats as above respectively?
# Another application:
#
# $sum = 0 +^ @values;
#
# Granted: ^ is not the best choice for a meta-operator which lowers
# something. :)
I don't really see the use of hypo-operators.
Note that everything I said here is subject to overriding by someone who
knows more than me. :^)
--Brent Dax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Configure pumpking for Perl 6
They *will* pay for what they've done.
