Re: Language constructs and callability
Sara Golemon wrote:
> Well, now... to be fair... You could make them functions and use the same
> parser trick the backtick operator uses. to map the non-parenthesized
> versions.... feels messy though. I'd just hate to get stuck with a hacky
> workaround like that for the long term.
That's what I meant by the "backwards compatibility layer". Not saying
we have to deprecate the use as a construct, but why can't we enable the
use as a function (and hence, callback, etc)? It feels less cleaner from
my point of view (userland).
--
Ryan McCue
<http://ryanmccue.info/>
Thread (22 messages)