On Sun Aug 04 19:02:50 2013, tonyc wrote: > On Sun Aug 04 18:59:28 2013, tonyc wrote: > > On Wed Jul 31 22:29:40 2013, tonyc wrote: > > > I've attached the rebased patches, but the final patch is obviously > > > incomplete. > > > > Brian updated his branch on github, I've attached the new patch series. > > > > Tony > > The only questionable part to me (besides some whitespace issues), is > this modification to S_scan_word(): > > @@ -9360,6 +9396,8 @@ S_scan_word(pTHX_ char *s, char *dest, STRLEN > destlen, int allow_package, STRLEN > parse_ident(&s, &d, e, allow_package, is_utf8); > *d = '\0'; > *slp = d - dest; > + if ( allow_package && *slp && *slp >= 4 ) > + deprecate_empty_packages(dest); > return s; > } > > I know parsers (and especially perl's parser) tend to be messy, but I'm > not sure that check belongs in scan_word - changing it from "scan a > word" to "scan a word and optionally warn". That could be problematic if scan_word is called multiple times for the same word, which is not implausible. Finding out whether that can happen will take some work. > Unless someone else speaks up I plan to apply it as is (with whitespace > fixes.) Are we going to apply it before we have even discussed why we are deprecating this, i.e., what problem we are trying to solve? Also, deprecating leading :: except when a sub with that name exists doesn’t make sense to me. That’s deprecating something except when people use it. -- Father Chrysostomos --- via perlbug: queue: perl5 status: open https://rt.perl.org:443/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=117087Thread Previous | Thread Next