Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from August 2009
At 9:47 PM +0200 8/25/09, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
>2009/8/23 Aristotle Pagaltzis <pagaltzis@gmx.de>:
>> * David Golden <xdaveg@gmail.com> [2009-08-21 13:40]:
>>> If I had to sum up my view, I want -OReadability. I appreciate
>>> that you've worked through the semantics for LHS and RHS, but
>>> I think the syntactic direction is wrong for Perl 5. (E.g. I'd
>>> like to combat the "line noise" meme, not fuel it.)
>>
>> Fully agreed.
>>
>> I feel this is too Perl 6ish.
>>
>> Perl 6 is non-flattening by default and offers the splat for
>> explicit flattening; Perl 5 is flattening by default and offers
>> the reference backslash for explicit preservation. Arguably, this
>> denies control of various kinds to the user, so explicit
>> flattening turns out to be a better overall idea.
>>
>> But it cannot be retroduced to Perl 5 without a significant hit
>> to the conceptual coherence of the language. Let's not try to mix
>> the two. It's a good idea to take cues from the conceptual work
>> in Perl 6, Perl 5 has too much baggage to water it down further
>> by porting over the semantics along with the concepts. Let's try
>> to transliterate the Perl 6 concepts into the existing Perl 5
>> semantics instead.
>
>I agree too.
>
>I notice that non-flattening behaviour is marked in Perl 5 by a
>keyword (my, local, our): it would be more visually consistent to use
>a keyword for binding as well, instead of ":()".
Something like Data::Alias's "alias" ?
use Data::Alias qw(alias);
alias my $x= $y;
alias my @array= @{$arrayref};
alias my %hash= %{$hashref};
Liz
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next