Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from January 2012
On 6 January 2012 20:31, Father Chrysostomos via RT
<perlbug-followup@perl.org> wrote:
> On Fri Jan 06 08:53:00 2012, demerphq wrote:
>> I consider this module to be in the same category as Scalar::Util and
>> as such I personally feel it should be in the core.
>
> I think it would be better to make it part of the core itself, resulting
> in a far simpler implementation. It could be enable with ‘use v5.xx’,
> as someone suggested.
I am fine with that. In fact I generally prefer not to have to use a
module to get access to important language features.
> Then, we should probably consider whether it does everything correctly.
> (I’m not saying it doesn’t; it just needs to be considered.)
>
> What is the *concept* behind not having exists $foo{bar}{baz} autovivify
> $foo{bar}? After all, it’s not exists() that is doing the autovivification.
>
> We need to come up with a concept that works (e.g., autovivification is
> a type of lvalue context, so only an outer lvalue context, propagated
> down to the rv2hv in question, will cause it) before we do much else.
>
> Otherwise we run the risk of having a model that is not self-consistent,
> with buggy edge cases.
Agreed.
Yves
--
perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next