On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 12:20:22AM -0500, Chris Prather wrote: > On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 11:57 PM, Chip Salzenberg <chip@pobox.com> wrote: > > >> Either way, shouldn't we be aiming to match the syntax to the semantics > >> in a way that's consistent with Perl 6? In other words require "is copy": > >> sub square ($num is copy) : method { > > > > Well ... that depends on the feasibility of read-only aliases, which I have > > yet to explore. > > The ability to parse something as a no-op for future compatibility, > and the ability to make that do something need not be related. True, that. I think most people agree that parsing as much of the Perl 6 syntax as possible is the base requirement. But Tim had said 'require "is copy"', which goes farther. If: (1) the only prototype that generates my ($x) = @_ is sub foo ($x is copy) *And* (2) read-only aliases are not feasible then this code sub foo ($x) {...} must either: (a) have a different meaning from Perl 6 or: (b) not be allowed. That's why I said it depends on the feasibility of read-only aliases -- Chip Salzenberg twitter:chipsalz "UTOPIA PLANITIA IS IN ORBIT is the new HAN SHOT FIRST" - Crisper Than ThouThread Previous | Thread Next