Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from August 2013
* Father Chrysostomos <sprout@cpan.org> [2013-08-19T16:41:42]
> Ricardo Signes wrote:
> > We allow ->@* at the end of an expression that we would've allowed up to
> > that point. Of your examples above, which I've taken the liberty of
> > numbering, #1 and #2 qualify. Of the rest, none do.
> ...
> > So: "@{ $foo->[0] }" isn't so bad; generic interpolation form
>
> Your response comes across as a bit ambiguous.
Sorry for the navel-gazing (although I'm glad I got it on record) and for the
delay in replying.
> So will ->@* and ->@[ and ->@{ interpolate?
I think they should, as described, when at the end of an existing parsed
expression. We should intuit that there is more to an expression in the above
forms.
> If so, what will the feature feature be called? (Yes, we need a fea-
> ture feature for that.)
I agree that we at least need a feature for interpolation.
> If we have a feature feature, then should it govern the new syntax
> altogether, or just its interpolation?
I think we should have it govern only interpolation. There would be no reason
to disable it for the other form. Given that, I'd call the feature
interpolate_postderef. I think. Got a better suggestion.
I'm open to the argument that this feature should not go in :5.20, although I'd
certainly turn it on.
--
rjbs
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next