I think we should not allow this, use substr() if you need more
functionality. Stick to very simple things with the {} stuff.
ah hell, I think Andi not even thought at using substr() within {}.
then my argumentation is something like void ;)
these examples were meant perlish and will do harm of course.
For me they're (negative indices and substr() method) completely interchangeable and as *this* range-solutions isn't incompatible with adding the "negative-indices"-feature afterwards, *I won't complain* if it'll not go in at first and I think others won't.
<example>
here a silly-but-simple-example(TM) how it *could* look like:
$foo='peterralf'.fill_in_rubbish_string().'!';
print 'hello '.$foo{0..4}.', hello '.$foo{5..8}.' is this rubbish:'.substr($foo,9,-1).'?';
print 'hello '.$foo{0..4}.', hello '.$foo{5..8}.' is this rubbish:'.$foo{9..-1}.'?';
</example>
this *almost* looks identical, why not simply use the {} syntax here? ok. if I was Andi or Zeev I could also argue, why not use substr() here, that's a point, because I don't see how this would be any harm.
as I stated before I won't complain any longer about this as we possibly have found an agreeable solution regarding range-indices.
andré