Re: RFC 39 (v2) Perl should have a print operator

I like very much a print() that returns the value of what you
printed rather than success.  I am always needing to define
littly intermediate temporaries so I can insert debugging code
inside huge, tortuous expressions.

I don't know if C(>"print me"<) is it though.

Did you take a look at RFC 66 before writing version 2?  It
suggests that angle brackets with a file handle on one side
or the other turn into IO operators.  I don't recall specifying
what the return value of the interaction would be, but the non-file
thing would work pretty well.  Assuming "nothing" to mean "the
default file handle" with an angle bracket in a void context,
we've got the print operator.  Don't know how it binds, probably
at the same level as operator C<<> to prevent riots.  Which is
all right.  That's what parentheses are for.


So I'm suggesting that 39 and 66 merge, and the print operator
be either angle bracket with void on the other side of it from
the thing that gets printed.

	$result = 32 + (< 23 + 12);

will print "35" and load C<$result> with 67.

So when we want to take the debugging print out, there's just one
char to remove instead of both.






> 
> The only comment this RFC has had so far is "Ick!" -- Jonathan Scott
> Duff <[email protected]>  I agree - inverse angle brackets won't
> improve Perl's reputation as an ugly language.  Maybe I will get used to
> them (and if I won't no-one will).  Or maybe not.  Perhaps the print
> operator should be:
> 
>     p(LIST)
> 
> so that other delimiters could be used.  Or we could hijack:
> 
>     ?LIST?




-- 
                          David Nicol 816.235.1187 [email protected]
                                       Damian Conway for president