Scripsit Paul D. Smith
> Without thinking about it for longer than a minute, I wonder why you
> chose ":&" instead of "&:"?
Laziness and conventional thinking, I'm afraid. It will be easiest to
leave the expand-variables-while-looking-for-the-first-colon logic
in read.c alone and then afterwards recognize special modifiers. My
instinct said then that since we're scanning left to right, the
modifier must *follow* the colon found.
Come to think of it, it will be just as easy to check for modifiers
to the left of the colon. OK, plan changed. New proposed separators
are "&:" and "|:" instead. That's more intuitive, as you say.
--
Henning Makholm "What has it got in its pocketses?"
|
