in reply to Why Perl Is Not My Favourite Functional Programming Language
in thread A mini-language for sequences (part 1)

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 ;)

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:«+»
    infix:<<+>>
    infix:{'+'}

    [download]
    So I'd currently write your code as: 
        my &plus_op_subref = &infix:«+»;
    my &not_op_subref  = &prefix:«!»;

    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]

      Just read the message on p6l :)

      Another idea, I think it'd be most efficient if we'd bind &plus_op_subref to &infix:«+» at compile-time:

          my &plus_op_subref ::= &infix:«+»;
    my &not_op_subref  ::= &prefix:«!»;

    say plus_op_subref(3, 2); # 5

      [download]

      Discussing about Perl 6 is fun :)

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]

In Section Meditations