Re: Why Perl Is Not My Favourite Functional Programming Language

When Perl 6 is ready, you will be able to use:

  my $plus_op_subref = \&infix:+;
  my $not_op_subref  = \&prefix:!;

  say $plus_op_subref.(3, 2); # 5
[download]

not tested ;)

Comment on Re: Why Perl Is Not My Favourite Functional Programming Language Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Why Perl Is Not My Favourite Functional Programming Language by TimToady (Parson) on Nov 06, 2004 at 23:02 UTC
Some slight tweaking is in order. The backslashes are not needed, since `&foo` is already a reference in scalar context. You don't need the dot to dereference the routine value either, though it doesn't hurt anything. You don't need the last `$` if you bind to `&plus_op_subref` instead. Also, one thing you couldn't know, since I just changed it, is that all operator names now use a variant of hash subscript syntax, so the name of the builtin addition operator is any of: `infix:Ť+ť infix:<<+>> infix:{'+'}` [download] So I'd currently write your code as: `my &plus_op_subref = &infix:Ť+ť; my &not_op_subref = &prefix:Ť!ť; say plus_op_subref(3, 2); # 5` [download] See http://www.wall.org/~larry/syn for preprints of the most recent Synopses. And http://www.wall.org/~larry/apo has Apocalypses annotated with "Update" sections.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^3: Why Perl Is Not My Favourite Functional Programming Language by iblech (Friar) on Nov 07, 2004 at 11:31 UTC
Just read the message on p6l :) Another idea, I think it'd be most efficient if we'd bind `&plus_op_subref` to `&infix:Ť+ť` at compile-time: `my &plus_op_subref ::= &infix:Ť+ť; my &not_op_subref ::= &prefix:Ť!ť; say plus_op_subref(3, 2); # 5` [download] Discussing about Perl 6 is fun :)	[reply] [d/l] [select]