Perl's lack of 'in' keyword

[Nicholas Clark]

On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 03:51:24PM +0100, Jonathan Stowe wrote:

Hateful software adding a newline in the mail headers.

> 	DNS_FROM_SECURITYSAGE
> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08)
> X-BeenThere: london.pm at london.pm.org
> X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.6
> Precedence: list
> Reply-To: "London.pm Perl M\[ou\]ngers" <london.pm at london.pm.org>
> List-Id: "London.pm Perl M\[ou\]ngers" <london.pm.london.pm.org>
> List-Unsubscribe: <http://london.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/london.pm>,
> 	<mailto:london.pm-request at london.pm.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> List-Archive: <http://london.pm.org/pipermail/london.pm>
> List-Post: <mailto:london.pm at london.pm.org>
> List-Help: <mailto:london.pm-request at london.pm.org?subject=help>
> List-Subscribe: <http://london.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/london.pm>,
> 	<mailto:london.pm-request at london.pm.org?subject=subscribe>
> Sender: london.pm-bounces at london.pm.org
> Errors-To: london.pm-bounces at london.pm.org
> 
> 2008/10/10 Andy Wardley <abw at wardley.org>:
> 
> >
> > It's certainly easier on the eyes than this:
> >
> >   C ?? X !! Y            # Perl6 - not yummy
> >
> 
> What's wrong with the existing syntax for the conditional operation?
> Or is this the "Protocols of The Elders of Zion" version of the Perl 6
> syntax ;-)

Right. So,

   C ? X : Y

fails because Larry wants the colon. So it became

   C ?? X :: Y

which gives Larry the colon (for many other purposes), and also makes it
consistent with all the other logical short circuiting operators (double
characters) (I think that the second part might be a retrofit, finding a
reason to justify the chance after the event. Whatever the analogy to
"backronym" is)

But I forget the reasoning behind the evolution of the :: to !!

Nicholas Clark