Re: Overlapping RFCs 135 138 164

Steve Fink wrote:
> 
> Hm. Larry didn't really like anything that would reverse the order of
> the pattern and the expression to be matched against, and I think I
> agree at least that it should always be possible to put the direct
> object at the beginning, preferably in a way usable by more than just
> regex-related operators.

Agreed. v2 of RFC 164 supports this syntax.

> My problem with RFC138 disappearing into RFC164 is that I strongly
> dislike the idea of losing // and having to use the five-letter match()
> all the time. 

Agreed too. Again, v2 I believe should address all these concerns. It
retains all of Perl 5 syntax plus much more that can be extended. I
think you'll like it.

And comments are always welcome!! These are "Requests for Comments"
after all. ;-)

-Nate