[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: LFM + LFSP = LFE?

To: Michael Vanier <address@hidden>, address@hidden
Subject: Re: LFM + LFSP = LFE?
From: Dan Sugalski <address@hidden>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 08:50:52 -0400
Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden
In-reply-to: <200306160616.h5G6GKJ14244@orchestra.cs.caltech.edu>
References: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0306160800500.29992-100000@duquesne.ce.chalmers.se><200306160616.h5G6GKJ14244@orchestra.cs.caltech.edu>
Sender: address@hidden

At 11:16 PM -0700 6/15/03, Michael Vanier wrote:
>-- perlish options to put keywords in different places
>    for conditionals (e.g. "foo() if /bar/")

This isn't, FWIW, something that originated with perl, though that's 
probably where Ruby got it from. Perl snagged the statement modifier 
stuff straight from DEC's BASIC/PLUS compiler. I find it quite 
natural to use, but I've logged a lot of time with both Basic and 
Perl.
-- 
                                         Dan

--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski                          even samurai
dan@sidhe.org                         have teddy bears and even
                                       teddy bears get drunk

References:
- Re: LFM + LFSP = LFE?
  - From: Robert Feldt <feldt@ce.chalmers.se>
- Re: LFM + LFSP = LFE?
  - From: Michael Vanier <mvanier@cs.caltech.edu>

Prev by Date: Re: LFM + LFSP = LFE?
Next by Date: Re: I'd rather edit my spreadsheet with a text editor
Previous by thread: Re: LFM + LFSP = LFE?
Next by thread: Re: LFM + LFSP = LFE?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread