develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from December 2015

Re: RFC: what to do about bitwise string operators (related to [perl#63574])

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Karl Williamson
December 15, 2015 02:05
Re: RFC: what to do about bitwise string operators (related to [perl#63574])
Message ID:
On 11/18/2015 08:37 PM, Ricardo Signes wrote:
> * Karl Williamson <> [2015-11-16T21:57:35]
>> I still don't think [operating bitwise on codepoints in character strings] is
>> useful in general.  Code points are not generally assigned where the
>> relationship between them is meaningful in bit operations ways.
> Agreed.  Although there are a few use cases that were pointed out, I think we
> need to decide what the behavior of &. on strings is and be consistent.  I
> still think the correct thing to do is assert that the arguments to &. are
> treated as, and must plausibly be, byte strings.
> It shouldn't matter whether the string is upgraded or not, as it's too easy to
> end up with bytes in an upgraded string or codepoints in a downgraded string.
> No Unicode Bug!

Ok.  I'd like ideas on how to word the deprecation message that gets 
raised.  I don't like what I've come up with:

"It is deprecated to '%s' a string containing non-byte data",

where %s is PL_op_name[PL_op->op_type]);

I don't like it because it uses the passive voice, but more importantly, 
the name becomes something like 'bit_xor', which I don't
think will necessarily make sense to the reader.

So, any ideas?

Thread Previous | Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About