Welcome to the Monastery | |
PerlMonks |
Re^3: Porting (old) code to something else [Perl 6 whitespace rules are not illogical!]by smls (Friar) |
on Feb 18, 2015 at 20:53 UTC ( [id://1117143]=note: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
I know that I am going to bump into it, over and over. I don't experience it that way personally. (I've started using Perl 6 for some of my private scripting needs a few months ago, which doesn't give me a huge amount of experience with it, but at least a general feeling for the language.) Once you internalize the rule that the paren has to immediately follow the identifier, you start looking at them differently – almost like they form a single token. And you really only need to think about it when writing a new function call, which is exactly when your brain is most likely to remind you of the syntax rules for function calls... ;) OTOH the Perl 5 ambiguity that I demonstrated by example in my above answer, is something that I still run into every now and then even after many years of using Perl. Because at the time when you add the parens in such a situation, you're probably not thinking about function calls, but rather about the Perl features involved in extending the expression you're editing: in the example of extending $line to (" " x $n).$line, that would be the repetition operator and string concatenation. That's my experience, at least... Other people's brains may work differently. :)
In Section
Meditations
|
|