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/>