Quite a strange syntax, I think. And apparently, Pugs thinks so too, because it croaks badly when I try to run your version.
Even though, the fact that neither Pugs nor me seem to recognize this syntax, this does not mean to any extent that it is illegal. If you can recall where you met it, I can definitely make a todo_test out of it for autrijus to implement...
| [reply]
[d/l] |
It's a rubyish thing: Open this and then call the block for every line of the resulting file handle, closing the file at the end. I'd not be surprised if it's a hopeful figment of my imagination.
| [reply] |
(=<>)[0..9].print
This seems to work and it is semantically much closer to what you proposed: it opens the file, calls print (which is not a block, but I think, it could be made one for no good) for each requested line.
It is an interesting question, whether we could omit the parentheses around =<>. Although Pugs does not seem to like it, I am not entirely sure that [] should bind so tight.
| [reply]
[d/l]
[select] |
