Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from October 2012
On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Peter Rabbitson <rabbit-p5p@rabbit.us>wrote: > > I do not agree with this observation, as you probably gathered by now. > In my eye the problem comes to this: given limited developer resources > does one sacrifice development of new features, or does one sacrifice > the syntactical coherence of the language as a whole? I do totally > recognize that having this cake and eating it is not an option, because > it violates the "limited developer resources" part. So, unless (in this > case) Peter or a likeminded programmer is interested in starting a > rudimentary perl API extension to make this feature CPAN-able, there are > only two choices left: delay the feature *until* the former is possible, > or close ones eyes and let it slip in the name of language evolution. > > Do you have any ideas/opinions on the API? I do consider it a necessary part of the implemenation, as my priorities are (in order): 1. Don't break anything if the feature is enabled, but the subs aren't used. 2. Allow the feature to be lexically enabled/disabled, since that allows: 3. Don't interfere with other modules which may do the same thing 4. Create an API to make it easier for other modules to get in the act. I know where to put the hooks for the API, but I don't know the best way to expose it.Thread Previous | Thread Next