Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from July 2013
* David Golden <xdg@xdg.me> [2013-07-03 19:25]: > On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Kent Fredric <kentfredric@gmail.com> wrote: > >If they eventually arrived together as one feature ( which I see it > >possible of doing ), you could control their scope with a lexical > >pragma, a lexical pragma that disabled multidimensional arrays at the > >same time. > > There's a big difference between 'turn on this feature' and 'turn off > this mis-feature' type lexical pragmas and 'swap this syntax for that > syntax' pragmas. > > Much like "use dots", the lexical change you describe would offer yet > another dialect of Perl 5, and I think that's a bigger Perl 5 language > design decision that needs to be made independent of any particular > feature. You bring up some sound principles, but are they applicable here? Are these features orthogonal? E.g. if you do *not* disable the misfeature, but *do* enable the new feature – what that combination do? Does its behaviour follow from the composition of the individual features, or is there a conflict? If there is a conflict, it will have either have to be explicitly resolved in a design decision, or it will have to be prevent by forbidding this combination. Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>Thread Previous | Thread Next