Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches

Tom Christiansen wrote:
> 
> Goodness, it certainly does.  It's loads easier than learning a new buzz^Wkeyword
> or a new switch, because you already know it.

Nobody with a sound mind would ever suggest that:

>   $stuff = () = $r =~ /crap/shit/;

Wouldn't still work. At least not me. But these two work:

    print "Got " . @array . " elements";
    print "Got " . scalar @array . " elements";

So why again does a "list" keyword not make sense? Seems "scalar" is
just as redundant here.

> However, if foo($) is thus "prototyped",
> you need but write
> 
>     foo( () = bar() )
> 
> to get bar() to be called in list context.  This is wholly intuitive.

For me, yeah. But I can name at least 30 people in my building alone
that have been hacking Perl for years who wouldn't get this. And a "well
they don't know what's going on" argument doesn't work. Not everyone is
a Perl expert.

Besides, you're telling me this:

   foo(list bar())

is *LESS* intuitive? I really don't buy that. 

-Nate