Re: optional third argument for has_many

[prev] [thread] [next] [Date index for 2004/10/02]

On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 01:59:35AM -0500, Y00R0B0T wrote:
> hmmm, I thought "syntactic sugar" was supposed to clarify programmatic
> constructs... foo( x=>y=>z), just looks like a typo to me... :)

It does to me as well. And will become extra confusing when Perl 6 code
is more common as it'll mean something slightly different in Perl 6.

I think it should be avoided.

Tim.

> thanks for clearing it up for me though.
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, 2 Oct 2004 08:17:56 +0200, David Jack Olrik <david@xxxxx.xx> wrote:
> > 
> > On Oct 2, 2004, at 0:07, Y00R0B0T wrote:
> > > I've seen other code posted on this list looking like this
> > > __PACKAGE__->has_many(col_id=>'PACKAGE::NAME'=>other_col);
> > >
> > > can  that call also just be:
> > > __PACKAGE__->has_many(col_id=>'PACK::NAME', 'other_col'); ?
> > 
> > Yes it can. In perl5 '=>' is just syntactic sugar for ','
> > So you could also write:
> > 
> > __PACKAGE__->has_many(col_id , 'PACK::NAME' , 'other_col');
> > 
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > David Jack Olrik <david@xxxxx.xx>             http://david.olrik.dk
> > GnuPG fingerprint C290 0A4A 0CCC CBA8 2B37 E18D 01D2 F6EF 2E61 9894
> > ["The first rule of Perl club is  You do not talk about Perl club"]
> > 
> >