develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from November 2011

Re: RFC: Autoloading charnames

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Karl Williamson
November 29, 2011 17:00
Re: RFC: Autoloading charnames
Message ID:
On 11/26/2011 09:00 AM, Ricardo Signes wrote:
> * David Golden<>  [2011-11-22T18:51:35]
>> Put differently, we should *NOT* do either of these:
>> (a) *say* we autoload charnames on \N{} and then *not* have
>> charnames::viacode() be a valid function call after \N{}
>> (b) *don't say* anything about charnames, but have
>> charnames::viacode() be valid after \N{}
> This summarized my feelings very well, too.
> I would prefer if \N{} did not cause charnames::viacode (etc) to just start
> working.  That is a pretty weak preference, but I prefer that functions like
> that have their module loaded explicitly.  \N{}, on the other hand, is (or
> ought to be) a much more basic language feature that should always work.
> This would require work to provide a way to only load charnames, and not
> everything else.  I know that work might not get done right now, and I think
> it's more useful to have \N{} Just Work than delay for this small point.
> My likely order of preference, best first:
>    1. using \N{} automatically loads the data needed to make it work, but
>       no other functions magically become available
>    2. using \N{} loads charnames normally, with documentation saying something
>       like "at present, using \N{} will load the charnames package, but this
>       is an implementation detail subject to change; if you're using functions
>       from it, C<use charnames>"
>    3. using \N{} loads charnames normally, and we 'fess up to it

Sunder scenario #1, what should happen after someone does 'no 
charnames'; should it just unload the functions, or also \N{}?

Thread Previous | Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About