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

On Mon, Jul 24, 2000 at 09:43:36PM +0100, Tim Bunce wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2000 at 01:26:36PM -0700, Gary Richardson wrote:
> > On Mon, 24 Jul 2000, Graham Barr wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 24, 2000 at 08:49:14PM +0100, Tim Bunce wrote:
> > > > He's also said that it's likely that dots will be allowed for indirect
> > > > object notation:
> > > > 
> > > > 	$foo.method();
> > > > 
> > > > same as
> > > > 
> > > > 	$foo->method();
> > > 
> > > That is actually one suggestion I dislike. People refered to this as aligning
> > > with other languages. But if you consider references like C/C++ pointers then
> > > we are already aligned with them.
> > 
> > And what about concating strings? What happens to the overloaded . then?
> 
> It's a big *may*. I'm sure Larry will weigh it all up carefully.

Which is why I have not really said much. No point in all shouting "but I like this
and that" until some decision is made. In fact theres no point shouting at all
as I assume most decisions will be made with plenty of insight and thought.

Graham.