Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from August 2012
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 06:52:35PM -0400, David Golden wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Jesse Luehrs <doy@tozt.net> wrote:
>
> > I think people will have fewer reservations about accepting weird
> > special cases like this for a keyword-based control structure
> > (especially considering the precedent set by while (<>), etc) than for
> > an infix operator (since it will be a weird special case either way -
> > "why can i do '$foo ~~ 1', but not '$a = 1; $foo ~~ $a'?".
> >
> >
> The opportunity for confusion exists either way. My suggestion is to
> change *one* thing -- smartmatch -- instead of *two* things -- smartmatch
> and when.
>
> Then all people have to know/relearn is the smartmatch table, not the
> smartmatch table *and* the special case rules for when.
But this *is* a change to when, that's what I'm saying. From perlsyn:
Exactly what the EXPR argument to "when" does is hard to describe
precisely, but in general, it tries to guess what you want done.
Sometimes it is interpreted as "$_ ~~ EXPR", and sometimes it does
not. It also behaves differently when lexically enclosed by a
"given" block than it does when dynamically enclosed by a "foreach"
loop. The rules are far too difficult to understand to be described
here. See "Experimental Details on given and when" later on.
For instance, currently "when ($a && $b)" means
"when ($_ ~~ $a && $_ ~~ $b)".
-doy
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next