Re: copying and s/// (was Re: Overlapping RFCs 135 138 164)

Mike Lambert wrote:
>
> or even:
> @a = s/a+/a/, @a;

This is actually the native syntax from RFC 164.

> Basically, the argument is that you could theoretically do @a =~ s/a+/a/
> with QS, along with many other things. So perhaps, imo, it would be best
> to just let QS handle it.

I'm fine with this. If you check out RFC 164, you'll see that the
capability to do this:

  @a =~ s/a+/a/;

is actually provided by a separate RFC, 170: "Generalize =~ to a
special-purpose assignment operator".

Comments on both RFCs are quite welcome, but I'd prefer people put them
in the appropriate threads, just so I can keep all the discussions
straight.

-Nate