develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from February 2000

Re: [p5p] proposed perlpod.pod patch

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Ilya Zakharevich
February 4, 2000 13:58
Re: [p5p] proposed perlpod.pod patch
Message ID:
Brad Appleton writes:
> Wolfgang Laun noted that even C<< ... >> will potentially break some
> existing pods. He was think of a sequence he's seen some use to indicate
> a return value of less-than-zero: C<< 0>. This is currently valid POD.
> Adding C<< ... >> would mean it has to be rewritten as C<< < 0 >> (or
> use the ugly E<lt>). Otherwise it will probably look like an unterminated
> sequence. (we could always go back to Larry's earlier proposal of 
> C<: ... :> if folks want).

How can C<::> be better than C<<>>?


Thread Previous | Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About