Clear questions and runnable code get the best and fastest answer |
|
PerlMonks |
Re^5: what would you like to see in perl5.12?by blazar (Canon) |
on Aug 21, 2007 at 10:54 UTC ( [id://634051]=note: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
But then you have a bare arrow on the left. Let me see, you have a situation like:
where THINGIE happens to be do BLOCK. With current syntax THINGIE can be:
All these thingies are "boxed", while yours look like the juxtaposition of two other thingies, with no surrounding box. It simply doesn't fit well, and is aesthetically unappealing. Granted, ->${\EXPR} looks awful, but it is an awful use of the existing syntax, which does not permit a more beautiful form. Your proposal makes for ugly syntax to start with: in all earnestness, looking at it from a distance it looks cleaner. But as you close up, you get an unsatisfactory feeling. Of course I would like to say that I have a much more beautiful proposal of my own, but no, I can't devise any... Update: striked out text above thanks to a /msg by ysth - "a simple scalar can always be a coderef or a method name (either qualified or not); the latter is unaffected by strict".
In Section
Meditations
|
|