Re: Curious: - vs .

2001-04-27 Thread Piers Cawley
Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Piers Cawley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Bart Lateur [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 15:52:47 -0600 (MDT), Dan Brian wrote: So why not $object!method(foo, bar);

Re: Curious: - vs .

2001-04-27 Thread Bart Lateur
On 26 Apr 2001 23:19:49 -0400, Buddha Buck wrote: $bar = [$obj method() ]; # method call $bar = method $obj() would be more consistent with perl's current $object = new Class() syntax. -- Bart.

Re: Curious: - vs .

2001-04-27 Thread Buddha Buck
Bart Lateur [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On 26 Apr 2001 23:19:49 -0400, Buddha Buck wrote: $bar = [$obj method() ]; # method call $bar = method $obj() would be more consistent with perl's current $object = new Class() syntax. Yes, well, some people want to get rid

Re: Curious: - vs .

2001-04-27 Thread Buddha Buck
Piers Cawley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Piers Cawley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: How about borrowing from Objective C? [$object method(foo, bar)]; How do you create an anonymous

Re: Curious: - vs .

2001-04-26 Thread Bart Lateur
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 15:52:47 -0600 (MDT), Dan Brian wrote: the idea of a dereference operator dumbfounds lots of folks. What's an object got to do with a reference, much less a pointer? A p5 object is very confusing to others for this reason, and so is the syntax. So you want a method

Re: Curious: - vs .

2001-04-26 Thread Dan Brian
the idea of a dereference operator dumbfounds lots of folks. What's an object got to do with a reference, much less a pointer? A p5 object is very confusing to others for this reason, and so is the syntax. So you want a method invocation syntax that doesn't remind people of references.

Re: Curious: - vs .

2001-04-26 Thread Piers Cawley
Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Bart Lateur [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 15:52:47 -0600 (MDT), Dan Brian wrote: So why not $object!method(foo, bar); In my opinion, because it doesn't provide sufficient visual distinction between $object and method().

Re: Curious: - vs .

2001-04-26 Thread Buddha Buck
Piers Cawley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Bart Lateur [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 15:52:47 -0600 (MDT), Dan Brian wrote: So why not $object!method(foo, bar); In my opinion, because it doesn't provide sufficient

RE: Curious: - vs .

2001-04-26 Thread Sterin, Ilya
Lateur; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Curious: - vs . Piers Cawley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Bart Lateur [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 15:52:47 -0600 (MDT), Dan Brian wrote: So why not $object!method(foo, bar); In my

Re: Curious: - vs .

2001-04-25 Thread Russ Allbery
Nathan Wiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: - C compatibility. One of Perl's great strengths over other HLL's is C compatibility. Though this is still arguably not as good as it can be, why distance ourselves from the language we're trying to interact with? You're