develooper Front page | perl.perl6.internals | Postings from September 2001

Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table?

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Dan Sugalski
Date:
September 3, 2001 19:54
Subject:
Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table?
Message ID:
5.1.0.14.0.20010903225159.0214ca70@tuatha.sidhe.org
At 10:50 PM 9/3/2001 -0400, Ken Fox wrote:
>Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > Oh, it gets better. Imagine injecting a lexically scoped sub into the
> > caller's lexical scope. Overriding one that's already there. (Either
> > because it was global, or because it was lexically defined at the same or
> > higher level)
> >
> > Needless to say, this makes the optimizer's job... interesting. On the
> > other hand, it does allow for some really powerful things to be done by
> > code at runtime.
>
>Frankly this scares the hell out of me. I like my safe little
>world of predictable lexical variables. That's the main reason I
>use them. (So I'm boring. I use strict too.)

Good. It should. It's a scary feature, and hopefully that same fear will 
strike anyone else who uses it, so they think twice (or maybe three times) 
before they do it. However, it *is* a powerful feature, and one that loses 
a good deal of its power if it's restricted to compile time only.

Besides, I'm not the guy to talk to about restricting this. Take it up with 
the language guys. :)

					Dan

--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski                          even samurai
dan@sidhe.org                         have teddy bears and even
                                      teddy bears get drunk


Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About