Re^13: Order of evaluation/interpolation of references

[trwww]

Admittedly I'm pretty far off topic from the thread, but I prefer:

print "Take ", 1 + 4, "\n";

and like this even more:

printf "Take %i\n", 1 + 4;

But the prospect of a cleaner syntax to interpolate more... stuff than we currently can is interesting.

[JavaFan]

That doesn't solve the problem though:

sub X {
    state $x;
    $x = shift;
   \$x;
}
print ${X(1)}, " ", ${X(2)}, "\n";
print ${X(1)}, " "; print ${X(2)}, "\n";
printf "%d %d\n", ${X(1)}, ${X(2)};
printf "%d ", ${X(1)}; printf "%d\n", ${X(2)};
__END__
2 2
1 2
2 2
1 2

[BrowserUk]

The curse of the trivial example. Would you agree that first is a lot easier on the eyes than the latter two?:

print "And the set contains [ { sort @a } ]\n";;
And the set contains [ brown dog fox jumps lazy over quick the the ]

printf "And the set contains [ %s ]\n", join ' ', sort @a;;
And the set contains [ brown dog fox jumps lazy over quick the the ]

print "And the set contains [ ", join( ' ', sort @a ), " ]\n";;
And the set contains [  brown dog fox jumps lazy over quick the the  ]

Even with the complication of the p5 syntax, it's still nicer to my eyes:

print "And the set contains [ @{[ sort @a ]} ]\n";;
And the set contains [ brown dog fox jumps lazy over quick the the ]