--- Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Besides $^_ is just uglier than anything else I've seen today...
lol -- I thought of it as a rather cute peeking-wink with a cauliflower
ear, but that's probably much more cutesiness than we want to encourage
in our language design.
===
On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 11:57:37AM -0800, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: > : Is it forbidden to use placeholder parameters in conjunction with
: > : "my"? Or would it simply not do anything useful? I ask because "Do
: > : what I mean" would seem to imply that 'my Dog $^foo' would spec
Larry Wall wrote:
> : Is it forbidden to use placeholder parameters in conjunction with
> : "my"? Or would it simply not do anything useful? I ask because "Do
> : what I mean" would seem to imply that 'my Dog $^foo' would specify
> : $^foo's type as 'Dog'. Though if you start doing too much of t
On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 10:42:35AM -0800, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: > +++ doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.podTue Feb 5 09:55:29 2008
: > @@ -2791,7 +2791,7 @@
: > are insufficient for defining the "pecking order" of code. Note that
: > you can bind to either a bare block or a pointy block. Bindi
> +++ doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.podTue Feb 5 09:55:29 2008
> @@ -2791,7 +2791,7 @@
> are insufficient for defining the "pecking order" of code. Note that
> you can bind to either a bare block or a pointy block. Binding to a
> bare block conveniently leaves the topic in C<$_>, so the fi
Author: larry
Date: Tue Feb 5 09:55:29 2008
New Revision: 14501
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod
doc/trunk/design/syn/S06.pod
Log:
Added named placeholders using $:foo twigil; idea from cognominal++:
Placeholder subs can now also autoadd [EMAIL PROTECT
