Front page | perl.perl6.language |
Postings from September 2001
RE: What's up with %MY?
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next
From:
Garrett Goebel
Date:
September 6, 2001 11:30
Subject:
RE: What's up with %MY?
Message ID:
71BEC0D4E1DED3118F7A009027B12028010BE027@EXCH_MISSION
From: Ken Fox [mailto:kfox@vulpes.com]
> Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >
> > I think you're also overestimating the freakout factor.
>
> Probably. I'm not really worried about surprising programmers
> when they debug their code. Most of the time they've requested
> the surprise and will at least have a tiny clue about what
> happened.
>
> I'm worried a little about building features with global effects.
> Part of Perl 6 is elimination of action-at-a-distance, but now
> we're building the swiss-army-knife-of-action-at-a-distance.
Would it be possible/desirable to have 'static' and 'dynamic' properties for
lexical scopes? Could we have static lexical scopes for things that can be
resolved before runtime, yet could be explicitly promoted to dynamic scopes
at runtime if needed?
Speaking from a solid position of ignorance, I must ask: does supporting one
exclude support for the other?
is static|dynamic {
my $pop = 0;
sub incr { ++$pop }
}
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next