Ah, ok.
I know three cases where parens matter (aside from when they override precedence or disambiguate syntax):
I think there's another one.
For the first two, it was either that or create a new operator. No other operators behave differently based on whether one their operand is list-like or not. It's a pity = and x didn't adopt the same definition of list-like, but then again, one expects lvalues and the other expects rvalues.
In reply to Re^8: ... for (@_) x= 2; (scalar assignment)
by ikegami
in thread ... for (@_) x= 2;
by rsFalse
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |