Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from October 2014
Le 29/10/2014 09:56, Tim Bunce a écrit : > > On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 12:41:34AM +0100, Leon Timmermans wrote: >> >> I agree that feels more natural (), but this also feels like a >> highly subjective thing. IMO, ideally we'd allow both variations >> (because why wouldn't we?). > > Because of the extra cost for people to implement support for variations now. > Because of the extra cost for people trying to maintain perl for years to come. This is highly dependent on what the actual implementation would be (no, I have no idea if it is intrusive or not). > Because of the extra cost for people trying to teach perl. If the thing can go anywhere, then you don't have to teach where it goes. > Because of the extra cost for people trying to learn perl. If the thing can go anywhere, then you don't have to learn where it goes. > Because of the extra cost for people trying to read other people's code. If the thing can go anywhere, then you don't have to remember where it goes. > > (I don't have a strong view on this particular feature, I just wanted to > point out that there are good reasons for now allowing multiple > variations of some proposed feature.) > > Tim. > Vincent V.Thread Previous | Thread Next