Re: Perl5 Language Extension: Definedness-Triggered Shortcut Operators

One syntactical alternative I could think of is:

A &&& B   # defined-and
A ||| B   # defined-or
A >>> B   # safe arrow
[download]

This would be a systematic approach reminiscent of the role of undef in ternary logic -- triple sign, third kind of truth value involved.

I am not sure whether a whole lot of other similar symbols like ^^^ would make as much sense, though, which means we then had to explain why only those mentioned above were there.

Comment on Re: Perl5 Language Extension: Definedness-Triggered Shortcut Operators Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Perl5 Language Extension: Definedness-Triggered Shortcut Operators by JavaFan (Canon) on Mar 18, 2012 at 12:20 UTC
`A &&& B # defined-and` You're not the first. Here's the reason why it's a bad idea: `$ perl -ce 'A &&& B' -e syntax OK` [download] It's not worth breaking backwards compatability for this.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^3: Perl5 Language Extension: Definedness-Triggered Shortcut Operators by martin (Friar) on Mar 20, 2012 at 17:42 UTC
You are right, triple ampersand parses as "boolean and" followed by a "subroutine call sigil". Too bad.	[reply]
Re^4: Perl5 Language Extension: Definedness-Triggered Shortcut Operators (odds) by tye (Sage) on Mar 20, 2012 at 19:18 UTC
The odds of there being code in the wild that does `$a&&&foo()` with no space seem pretty slim to me. It even seems rather unlikely in an obfu. Not that I have personally witnessed p5p be swayed by such arguments before. The odds of "`$a &&& $b`" being non-broken code in the wild seems even slimmer. - tye	[reply] [d/l] [select]


Pathologically Eclectic Rubbish Lister
	PerlMonks