develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from August 2001

Re: [PATCH 2 of 3] $] is deprecated - EXTERMINATE, EXTERMINATE, EXTERMINATE

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Gurusamy Sarathy
Date:
August 23, 2001 07:34
Subject:
Re: [PATCH 2 of 3] $] is deprecated - EXTERMINATE, EXTERMINATE, EXTERMINATE
Message ID:
200108231433.f7NEXWf23772@smtp3.ActiveState.com
On Thu, 23 Aug 2001 10:08:27 EDT, John Peacock wrote:
>Ronald J Kimball wrote:
>> (Have I mentioned lately how much I dislike version
>> strings?)

Er, the way I know them, they're no different than regular strings.
What's not to like?

>NOTE: you are probably going to HATE the patches I am going to send 
>making v-strings be the preferred method for storing version strings.
>:~(

Sorry for coming into thread thread late, but IMHO, we made a very
good decision based on Larry's ideas that these so-called "v-strings"
should be nothing but some syntax sugar to write what you can otherwise
write using escapes (i.e. it is pure expressiveness, and no semantics).
If what you're saying above means that we're somehow differentiating
these "v-strings" from regular strings, everywhere, I'd like to see some
very good reasons why we're going this route.  Please realize that doing
such a thing is tantamount to introducing a new basic type--it is a
kludge to do it without making it a first class type any way you look
at it, and it would be bloat to make it a first class type for something
as relatively silly.

I'm well aware of the minor internal magic that tacks on pNOK to pass a
hint to the lexer that version checking is desired in require and use.
Let's not extend this purely internal hack into the realms of user
visibility without thinking it through, shall we?

IOW, I don't see (after a cursory examination of the thread so far)
what problem is being solved by extending the semantics of "v-strings"
(which BTW is not an official term because Larry didn't like it).  It
seems we're overengineering it purely for the sake of hack-happiness
here.  I'm ok with simply reorganizing the code to make it cleaner,
but it seems to me that adding new semantics is fraught with peril.

Thanks for listening.


Sarathy
gsar@ActiveState.com

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