|
|
|
| Perl Monk, Perl Meditation | |
| PerlMonks |
Re: Re: Re^3: Why not support this syntax?by scott (Chaplain) |
| on Apr 30, 2001 at 14:13 UTC ( [id://76590]=note: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
This is an archived low-energy page for bots and other anonmyous visitors. Please sign up if you are a human and want to interact.
Cool. If you don't mind, I'll just add this to my personal collection of bits o'code. Good idea, and we can even cover that one ourselves, too But we can cover *anything* ourselves ... with enough effort. From another of your posts on the same topic: Perl is a language for getting your job done - right. After writing this little subroutine, the job is done. Why wait for other people to do jobs for you that you can do for yourself in 30 seconds. I don't think anyone said anything about *waiting*. Making Perl6 will require a great deal of effort, it's going to happen regardless of whether or not this particular syntax is included, and the process of deciding what the syntax will be has been deliberately opened to public debate. So why not let everyone know on what we think said effort should be spent constructing? Philosophically yours,
In Section
Meditations
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||