Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from May 2010
karl williamson wrote: > Zefram wrote: >> karl williamson wrote: >>> Note that there is a behavior change that may be incompatible with >>> existing code. >> >> Does the parsing of "/foo/lt +1" change? >> >> -zefram >> > > Yes. > > When this was being discussed last year, and these modifiers were agreed > on, no one mentioned adding modifier letters could conflict with > existing syntax. But someone thought of it later, as I remember seeing > a .t file patch come through to make sure that things like > '/foo/and bar' don't ever change in meaning. > > In looking at this more, I see existing ambiguities in ge and cmp. I > suppose those have always been there, and so no code ever got run > without uncovering the problem. > > It appears that 'l' can't be used as it changes the meaning of > '/foo/le +1'. > > And neither can 't' because of 'gt'. > > 'h' for historical could be used instead of 't' (I can't think of any > conflicts with this), but what could be used to mean locale? > In thinking about modifier letters that can't possibly conflict with any existing constructs, I came up with the following: To mean the way it always has worked: 'h' for historical, or 'r' for oRiginal, retro or retarded. To mean locale: 'z' for zone. I asked Yves privately about this, and he wonders if it is worth trying to not break constructs like '/foo/lt +2'Thread Previous | Thread Next