Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from April 2012
On Tue Apr 24 13:16:11 2012, doy@tozt.net wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 12:57:12PM -0700, Father Chrysostomos via RT
> wrote:
> > On Tue Apr 24 11:59:36 2012, jv wrote:
> > > [Quoting Jesse Luehrs, on April 24 2012, 13:49, in "Re: [perl
> #108286] W"]
> > > > > I cannot imagine a sensible purpose to override else. Can you?
> > > >
> > > > No, I think that if() should be the overridable part, with
> 'else' and
> > > > 'elsif' just as much a part of the syntax as '{' or '}'.
> > >
> > > Precisely.
> >
> > Iâm having trouble understanding what you disagree with.
> >
> > What I am proposing would allow
> >
> > use subs "if";
> > sub if { ... }
> >
> > plus magic attached to \&if via Devel::Declare or Devel::CallParser
> to
> > parse if/elsif/else however it wants, maybe even allowing elsunless.
>
> I have no issues with this. But if the \&if is responsible for parsing
> the entire if/elsif/else construct (which I think it should be), how
> does the idea of overriding elsif/else independently work at all?
You would only do that if you wanted to start a construct with elsif or
else.
--
Father Chrysostomos
---
via perlbug: queue: perl5 status: open
https://rt.perl.org:443/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=108286
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next