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