Re: y/rple/yma/ (was: LALR (was Re: Working Group Proposal))

[email protected] ("Randy J. Ray")
Newsgroups perl.bootstrap
Message-ID <[email protected]>
  >>> $foo.method();
  >>> 
  >>> same as
  >>> 
  >>> $foo->method();

  Tom> It's a perennial *Active*State* request.  They want it so they can
  Tom> simplify their documentation for *Micro*Soft* interfaces, since
  Tom> "everybody else" uses dots.

Is it just me, or are these two not supposed to be the same in the C++
world anyway? Just as these are distinct in C++:

      foo.method()

      foo->method()

Technically, were Perl to adopt such a syntax, I would expect it to look
more like:

      $$foo.method()

      $foo->method()

unless the proposed syntax includes blessing non-reference scalars as
objects. And that, I would argue against almost to the point of fanaticism.
I can't imagine the above syntax would make the AS Perl any more
MS-friendly in the least bit.

Randy
--
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Randy J. Ray            | "NSA doesn't need a key to compromise security in
[email protected]        | Windows. Programs like Back Orifice can do it without
415-777-9810 x246       | any keys." --Bruce Schneier on the MS/NSA controversy
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.