Phoenix.pm: quoting constant hash keys survey
Scott Walters
scott at illogics.org
Mon Apr 19 19:20:14 CDT 2004
Argh. Something must be done about this list.
<<foo bar>> is qw{foo bar}, and %foo<<foo>> and %foo<<foo bar>> are
extrapolations from that syntax. So it's either %foo<<foo>> or
%foo{'foo'}...
-scott
On 0, "Douglas E. Miles" <perlguy at earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> Apparently, this didn't go through the first time.
>
> Scott Walters wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I'm soliciting opinions - no experience with Perl beyond the basics are required
> > so this isn't for experts only. I want as many opinions as I can get.
> >
> <SNIP>
>
> I'm late here, but here's my vote...
>
> I don't like this:
>
> %foo`bar
>
> I think that
>
> %foo{bar} should mean %foo{'bar'}
>
> as this is the common case.
>
> Maybe
>
> %foo<<bar>> should mean %foo{bar()}
>
> unless this violates other uses of <<>>.
>
> Personally, I don't mind typing the (), so I don't particularly feel the
> need for extra syntax. That said, if ` is added and:
>
> %foo{'bar'} is the same as %foo<<bar>>
>
> and
>
> %foo{bar} is the same as %foo{bar()}
>
> I probably just won't use the new syntax.
>
>
More information about the Phoenix-pm
mailing list