Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from August 2012
* Ricardo Signes <perl.p5p@rjbs.manxome.org> [2012-08-22T20:29:15] > * Damian Conway <damian@conway.org> [2012-08-22T19:55:41] > > Hmmmm. In light of my arguments in defending bidrirctional overloading, > > and of chromatic's observation regarding the relative ease of various types > > of inversion-of-control on error reporting, I'm now convinced the > > proposal should be: > > > > [ most of table elided ] > > Any Any undef (with fatalizable warning) > > I agree, including with the spirit of this one quoted line, although it > should be "false" and not "undef." :-) > > I've been checking my mail while away from home, and making notes on the > various things that had come up, and this proposal covers all the same things > I'd wanted to say, so I am very happy that I can just say, "yes, this." ...and as soon as I got in bed, I realized that there were two cases I'd conflated in my reply, which I think need to be considered a bit more in my head. Case one: $x ~~ *main Case two: $y = 1.23; print $y; $x ~~ $y; My gut is that both should warn, and only the first should fail. This is really just my gut impression as I hop out of bed to get this reply posted, though. Back to bed now. -- rjbsThread Previous | Thread Next