Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from December 2008
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 Thou
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next