Rafael Garcia-Suarez writes: > On 27 July 2014 01:16, Ricardo Signes <perl.p5p@rjbs.manxome.org> wrote: > > > To me, the most significant concern is probably the one about > > improving our defaults. I'm not sure I think this is the best > > solution, but let me know if you think it's clearly better or worse, > > or if it suggests anything else to you: > > > > * use feature 'magic_open_argv' > > * ...which goes into the default feature bundle, and old versions > > * ...but not the new version's bundle, so it's off by default on use 5.22 > > * ...and it's on in the while() code generated by -n > > * ...but we have -N and -P > > Why the double negation? This way, the only double negative is in Rik's description of the plan. From a Perl programmer's point of view, it's simply that somebody wanting to use the feature use-s it. > use feature 'nomagic_open_argv' should work similarly. But that imposes the double negative on users. In that if in perl 5.22 nomagic_open_argv is the default, somebody wanting the magic behaviour would have to do: no feature qw<nomagic_open_argv>; That's unquestionably a double negative, and is far harder to grok than: use feature qw<magic_open_argv>; It also prevents bundling all the features you want into a single call. Instead of: use feature qw<say magic_open_argv unicode_strings signatures>; You'd have to write: use feature qw<say unicode_strings signatures>; no feature qw<nomagic_open_argv>; It'd be a weird exception that most features are enabled positively but one of them is enabled by disabling its opposite — an exception that's only explained by historical reasons. So I think nomagic_open_argv is much worse from the point of view of not avoiding banishing double negatives ... Smylers -- Girls don't wear their shoes out, and boys don't care about style? Clarks think so: http://j.mp/clarksgirlboyposters Disagree? Don't want shops promoting gender stereotypes to children? Please sign the petition: http://j.mp/clarksgirlboypetitionThread Previous | Thread Next