develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from June 2013

[perl #118563] usage of letter bases as alphabetic identifiers disallowed?

From:
Linda Walsh via RT
Date:
June 25, 2013 00:27
Subject:
[perl #118563] usage of letter bases as alphabetic identifiers disallowed?
Message ID:
rt-3.6.HEAD-2552-1372120038-1063.118563-15-0@perl.org
On Fri Jun 21 10:24:19 2013, rabbit-p5p@rabbit.us wrote:

> Identifier parsing
> Up until Perl 5.18, the actual rules of what a valid identifier was
> were a bit fuzzy.
---
    Please note, my bug report was against 5.16.2.  If you feel 5.18.0
has made my request for wider latitude in perl identifers moot, I am
more than happy.  Are you saying the cases I mentioned above work in
5.18.0?  If not, I'm not sure the situation has been improved.

> Perl source code, not identifiers introduced through symbolic
> references, which have much fewer restrictions.
----
    That doesn't seem inconsistent to you?  Or.. why is that?  How are
they different?  You mention 5.18 being different than 5.16, so before
you become irritated with my not reading the 5.18 docs, realize this
bug is from someone still using 5.16.2.  If a section in the 5.18
docs explains this reasoning, please let me know which section(s) I
should read to update my knowledge to the current release.

> Also (for the sake of everyone on the list, not just mine) I would
> like
> to preempt this thread from continuing in the spirit of "Gah... I see
> the docs now, but they do not agree with my reality. Let's change the
> docs and and the interpeter to fit my preestablished misconceptions".
----
Actually, it wouldn't be about them fitting my pre-established
misconceptions.  I'm saying the behavior in 5.16.2 doesn't match what I
would like to see in terms of usability.  If there are technical reasons
that prevent that, I would love to learn about them.  


> In the spirit of such preemptiion: Linda, if you feel it is
> appropriate
> to take the discussion in this direction - I am sorry, it is not
> appropriate  [.It would only be appropriate if you read up on at least
a small
> portion of the can of worms labeled "unicode in Perl identifiers"]
----
    If you are referring to the URL you quote:

[https://metacpan.org/module/RJBS/perl-5.18.0/pod/perldata.pod#Identifier-parsing]

    I see why Ricardo would say what he said, though that he would
answer a bugreport against 5.16.2 with assumed references to a doc not
referenced, seems cryptic at best.  Just because 5.18 has certain rules
doesn't mean those should be the final rules.  Note, the 5.18 discussion
was a closed discussion and public discussion wasn't not allowed.  To
expect public buy-in, on something they had no input into seems to be on
the presumptive and possibly rude side.  Also, for my own sake, I would
like to read up on what the difference is between
XID and ID and what makes for the decision to classify a character as
such.  It may well be that the unicode standard needs updating, since I
don't see why modern ideographics should be excluded while historical
ones are included in the XID range.

   As for various other responses, I'm not sure how I can handle the
ones of intense passion, other than to wish for your healing that my
language not be so disturbing to you.  It sure seems like there is a
problem of over-reaction to what has been characterized as polite but
unpleasant, or extremely hostile passive aggressive tone.  Interesting
that women's communications are often described by others are passive
aggressive, yet that no one possible would give the slightest
credibility that the attitudes of a few 'aggressive' types, demonstrated
on this list might have anything rooted in sexism.

    As for my ascribing the worst possible motives to people who exclude
me from participation -- that's fairly normal.  That's why in general,
in government we like openness and transparency.  

    Also, at least, two people brought up the idea of Ricardo being a
volunteer -- like that has some inherent meaning that I should know. 
I'm a volunteer too, and I try to treat other volunteers as I am treated
-- I have been trying to use how I am treated as a minimum bar for how I
should treat others -- was that your point?

Sorry if my words sound unambiguously unacceptable... but I think a
large part of hearing of them is in the ear of the listener.




---
via perlbug:  queue: perl5 status: resolved
https://rt.perl.org:443/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=118563



nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About