Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from July 2008
Ed Avis wrote:
> Either have a warning or change the semantics; I don't think you need both.
> Once people see the warning they will change their code to either explicit magic
> or explicit boring-file-opening. Anyway, we can't plan as far ahead as 5.14.
Why not? To me it seems like a standard deprecation workflow, only that
we immediately replace the function with something else...
> Pragmas are useful when you want to change the global behaviour of a program.
> But typically <> is used in just one place, the main loop, and certainly in just
> one source file (by an unfortunate accident of perl's implementation, you cannot
> in general pass the ARGV filehandle to subroutines expecting a filehandle).
[Actually I thought about a pragma that switches behaviour only in this
one version, but that would need to be called like 'eval { require
safe_diamond }', which is ugly.]
> So I think a pragma is overkill here, better a way to explicitly say what you
> want: <SAFE_ARGV> or <MAGIC_ARGV>, with appropriate syntactic sugar to provide a
> <<>> operator or whatever.
Yes, that's also OK.
>> * "use v5.x" (for x < 12) of course should switch magical behaviour back
>> on for '<>'.
>
> I think this is also getting a bit hairy and tangled.
> ...
> Let's not put extra bizarre stuff into 'use 5.xx', it is awkward enough already.
Umm, I thought that this was one of the reasons to use 'use v5.x': not
to be bug-compatible, but to be feature-compatible between mayor versions.
But OK, this was just an idea and isn't necessary for the procedure to work.
Roland
--
"I WILL NOW PERFORM THE PROCEDURE, MASTER!!"
*laughsmaniacally*
Thread Previous