From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.paulhaahr.com ([63.203.198.9]) by hawkwind.utcs.utoronto.ca with SMTP id <51212>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 18:06:51 -0500 Received: (from haahr@localhost) by mail.paulhaahr.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA01224; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 20:37:18 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: dmul.paulhaahr.com: haahr set sender to haahr@paulhaahr.com using -f Message-Id: <8XBpTIaE1V@dmul.paulhaahr.com> Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 23:37:16 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Paul Haahr To: rc@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu Subject: Re: $^t In-Reply-To: <200109040316.f843GRP17441@merton.aus.deuba.com> References: <200109040143.f841ht416783@rakitzis.com> <200109040316.f843GRP17441@merton.aus.deuba.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.30 under Emacs 20.7.1 Callum Gibson wrote > FWIW, I think $^t is more logical since it conserves special chars, even > if it reverses the sense of the ^ operator. I don't think it reverses the sense at all. $^ was originally intended to mean ``repeated application of the ^ operator on a variable.'' For what it's worth, that syntax in Byron's implementation appears to date from early 1991: From: byron@archone.tamu.edu (Byron Rakitzis) To: haahr@adobe.com Subject: list flattening Date: Wed, 9 Jan 91 17:55:45 CST is now in as an operator. yip yip. (I also have a drop of rc from half an hour before that message which doesn't include $^, so we can be fairly precise about its timing.) --p