develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from October 2014

Re: [perl #123069] signature/attribute syntax is awful

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
perl
Date:
October 29, 2014 12:15
Subject:
Re: [perl #123069] signature/attribute syntax is awful
Message ID:
5450DA5E.1090905@profvince.com


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


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About