Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from March 2000
JVromans@squirrel.nl (Johan Vromans) wrote
> Tom Christiansen <tchrist@chthon.perl.com> writes:
>
> > >But it certainly ought to be documented. Patch attached.
> >
> > I like to see it documented as an error.
>
> Okay, I'll bite. This assumes the previous patch is _not_ applied.
Errr... you seem to be missing the point at several different levels.
i) Tom's remark was expressing approval of my patch. It might
have been phrased "I like to see that it is being documented as
an error."
ii) In particular, my patch provided the required documentation.
iii) Insofar as the -> operator is inadequately documented, a patch
is needed to perlop rather than perldelta.
iv) perldelta has traditionally been used for recording changes since
previous Perl versions. But no change is being made here.
Using it to announce possible future deprecations seems
eccentric.
v) @x->[2] and scalar(@x)->[2] shouldn't be lumped together. As
discussed on p5p long ago (pre 5.004 ?), what @x->[2] does is
deliberate, if unfortunate. Whereas having scalar(@x)
evaluate to anything other than the length of @x is a bug.
Mike Guy