Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from May 2010
On Wed, 19 May 2010 09:56:59 +0200, Steffen Mueller <smueller@cpan.org> wrote: > Hi all, > > Jan Dubois wrote: > > On Tue, 18 May 2010, Eric Brine wrote: > >> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 4:04 PM, demerphq <demerphq@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> Basically we only have to worry about 'l' because of 'le', and 'f' > >>> because of 'if'. Any others? > > [...] > > >> Any of the following immediately following the delimiter are currently > >> valid, but will become a syntax error (e.g. /foo/le+1) or different valid > >> code (e.g. /foo/lt+1): > >> > >> - unless & until from /u > >> - le & lt from /l > >> - [none] from /t > >> > >> We're precluded from using these: > >> > >> - /a (and) > >> - /f (for, foreach) > >> - /n (ne) > >> - /w (when, while) > > I think these are MUCH more likely to be a problem than the three above. I have used '/pat/and action' a LOT in one-liners, alwyas being aware that 'and' works, and 'or' doesn't > >> We don't have to worry about these: > > [...] > > > Yes, but why bother? What is wrong with your previous suggestion to only allow > > the new modifiers after a > > > > use 5.014; > > > > That lets us pick the letters based on mnemonic value instead of having to > > work around some obscure edge cases. And the code using the new letters > > will not work on earlier Perl versions anyways, so having the "use 5.014" > > in there is a good idea anyways. > > I couldn't agree more with this last paragraph. > > > This will also allow to us to turn any currently unused modifiers into syntax > > errors right away for all 5.14+ code as well without breaking any compatibility. > > > > What's not to like? > > Edge cases and action at a distance. Edges cases internally (with any > such decision, we start maintaining to branches of behaviour in the same > code base). Action at a distance in user code. > > Of course, use VERSION is lexical, so this isn't action across 1M lines > of code, but it may well be across a couple of thousands in a badly > written application or module. > > Don't get me wrong. I'd rather move forward and make behaviour > conditional on the use VERSION at the top of the file than not move on > at all. But I believe that this is a case of being overzealous regarding > backwards compatibility. > > So I guess overall, this is a +1 to any solution, with use VERSION or > without. > > --Steffen -- H.Merijn Brand http://tux.nl Perl Monger http://amsterdam.pm.org/ using 5.00307 through 5.12 and porting perl5.13.x on HP-UX 10.20, 11.00, 11.11, 11.23, and 11.31, OpenSuSE 10.3, 11.0, and 11.1, AIX 5.2 and 5.3. http://mirrors.develooper.com/hpux/ http://www.test-smoke.org/ http://qa.perl.org http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/Thread Previous | Thread Next