Hi,

To me it looks right:

If it looks like a string, it will be treated as string.

Here's a small programm to test the new ~~ Operator.

use strict;
use warnings;
use 5.010;


## No quotes
&test_smartmatch(42, 42);
# yields 42 smartmatches 42

&test_smartmatch(42,42.0);
# yields 42 smartmatches 42

## Single Quotes
&test_smartmatch(42,'42.0');
# yields 42 smartmatches 42.0 

&test_smartmatch('42','42.0');
# yields 42 doesn't smartmatch 42.0

## Double Quotes
&test_smartmatch("42","42.0");
# yields 42 doesn't smartmatch 42.0


###########################################################
sub test_smartmatch {
    my $lhs = shift @_;  # Left Hand Side (LHS)
    my $rhs = shift @_;  # Right Hand Side (RHS)    
    if ( $lhs ~~ $rhs ) {
        say "$lhs smartmatches $rhs";        
    } else {
        say "$lhs doesn't smartmatch $rhs";
    }
} ##
###########################################################
__END__
[download]

Just my 2 cents.

Hope this helps.

the first row that applies, in either order, determines the match beha
+viour
...
Num     numish[!] numeric equality         $a == $b
Any     Str       string equality          $a eq $b
Any     Num       numeric equality         $a == $b
Any     Any       string equality          $a eq $b
[download]

So surely it's using the second case (Any ~~ Str) using string equality.

yes, I see that it is correct based on the perlsyn. The question what is the clever reasoning behind the fact that there is no numish ~~ numish using == rule in the table slightly above the Any ~~ Str?

Indeed. So then 42 ~~ "42.0" would probably be true. I need to get 5.10 installed. I wonder how long before the ubuntu devs will have it ready.

-Paul

I like it, and would be unhappy to see it work any differently. May I suggest you use the +0~~ (aka ~~0+) operator?

The +sperm and sperm+ operators?

:-)